Phil Foden - What Is His Potential?

RedRonaldo said:
7 goals 3 assist in 11 games so far this season, only 22.

I don’t care if people think he is overrated/overhyped or not. He is my top 5 best player from the new generation, alongside with Mbappe, Haaland, Vinicius Junior and Pedri.
Click to expand...
Hes a fantastic player, shame hes not in red shirt. I think he could be better used for england playing the griezmann role. Great at link up play, can carry the ball and is intelligent. For me personally a bigger talent than bellingham. Shame hes a city player.
 
He's pretty good.

Will never be sn all timer but he'll be part of many great teams for years to come(he kinda already is).
 
He's very good but still drifts in and out of games too much and occasionally doesn't impose himself at all. Needs to get better at taking the game by the scruff.
 
Let's be real, he only plays wide for City because he's too good to leave out but we have Kevin De Bruyne and co in the middle. For England he should be our number 10.
 
He ain't the same player for England. Never has been, that's why I think the clamour and idea "we must find a way to fit in Foden" advocated for by the likes of Neville strange. He's had plenty of game time but the fact is his performance isn't great.

Foden is just one of a number of options for England. No reason he is massively ahead of Rashford. No reason to have him higher than Saka who performs well. No reason someone like Maddison can't be introduced based on club form and Foden wouldn't have much argument.

At the moment he's a talented option but he's a conundrum. Maybe a new manager would look at a central position. Maybe the football isn't suiting him. Whatever it is, he's not the same player.
 
I think I might have said this before, but he's missing the physical attribute that would allow him to make full use of his technical ability. If he was stronger and/or had more of a burst of pace he'd be fantastic.
 
Abraxas said:
He ain't the same player for England. Never has been, that's why I think the clamour and idea "we must find a way to fit in Foden" advocated for by the likes of Neville strange. He's had plenty of game time but the fact is his performance isn't great.

Foden is just one of a number of options for England. No reason he is massively ahead of Rashford. No reason to have him higher than Saka who performs well. No reason someone like Maddison can't be introduced based on club form and Foden wouldn't have much argument.

At the moment he's a talented option but he's a conundrum. Maybe a new manager would look at a central position. Maybe the football isn't suiting him. Whatever it is, he's not the same player.
Click to expand...

That's true of most players though. Which is why you have to pick them on club form.

Last night was just one of those games where a player doesn't get involved. No real fault of their own. Shaw wasn't involved much either.
 
Barely touched the ball last night. Not sure if it was tactical or his own accord, but he barely moved infield to get involved. I think Southgate intentionally told Shaw to not push up too much to avoid leaving Dembouz a bunch of space on the counter. If Foden was going to just stick out wide all 90 we should’ve started Rashford and got him to run behind Kounde all game
 
Marwood said:
That's true of most players though. Which is why you have to pick them on club form.

Last night was just one of those games where a player doesn't get involved. No real fault of their own. Shaw wasn't involved much either.
Click to expand...
Some are closer than others, though. Saka seems to be playing very well. Rashford has made an impact in the tournament. That is two natural options for those positions that seen to bring better form for England in general and are also in good club form. Maddison might also argue that his form is better than Foden and he's not even had a look in.

I don't think Foden is quite this superstar talent that is getting built up. He's a very good footballer but I don't see a must play type of talent and even if he is it's about delivering at a certain point. We must be 20 odd games in and he hasn't threatened that. I'm not saying he's not a valuable option going forward but he's not a must play or even close.
 
The left side was invisible last night, especially in the first half...disappointing performance from Foden.

But just like the hype around Bellingham from the media, I don't really take any notice of it! For me it was a somewhat normal performance from Foden in an England shirt.
 
Needs a central role. Its a pity that he isn't getting that for both club and country.
 
dinostar77 said:
Hes a fantastic player, shame hes not in red shirt. I think he could be better used for england playing the griezmann role. Great at link up play, can carry the ball and is intelligent. For me personally a bigger talent than bellingham. Shame hes a city player.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. But what to do with Bellingham then?
 
Abraxas said:
Some are closer than others, though. Saka seems to be playing very well. Rashford has made an impact in the tournament. That is two natural options for those positions that seen to bring better form for England in general and are also in good club form. Maddison might also argue that his form is better than Foden and he's not even had a look in.

I don't think Foden is quite this superstar talent that is getting built up. He's a very good footballer but I don't see a must play type of talent and even if he is it's about delivering at a certain point. We must be 20 odd games in and he hasn't threatened that. I'm not saying he's not a valuable option going forward but he's not a must play or even close.
Click to expand...

One or two are yeah in each tournament squad. Saka agree is the obvious one this time and that's why he starts.

But I still don't think there's a real case for Rashford or Maddison starting. Both have struggled for a while now with a bit of an improvement this season. Not enough to displace guys playing consistently well.

In terms of subs though, I do think Rashford should have been on earlier.
 
I think [some] England fans, coaches and management have no idea how to process players like Sancho and Foden. It’s no coincidence they come from the same school of development, one that is some years ahead of the mean in terms of the intricacy of the play and boldness in interplay. You take that away from these players and you’re left with fish out of water mixing it with others who aren’t daring or bold enough to play in the manner that facilitates their game and gets the tune out of them that earned them the plaudits in the first place.

England’s football is still limited; more about driving, athletic individuals than the collective, which is why certain players are destined to thrive and others to look like half the player they are in the correct environment. That lack of interplay is a death knell for Foden. He needs it, desperately. He cannot powerfully run through swathes of men who are faster and stronger than he is; he needs the give and goes; he needs that daring in the build up that enables him to sneakily find space between the lines. If it’s all base play with driving runs and weak turnovers, he is absolutely destined to be a peripheral figure because there’s no real inlet for him to get involved in the play. Call that a fault of his if you want. The reality is that the staff and manager either have no clue how to incorporate that kind of player, or simply don’t want to.

The way England currently play, an athletic pace player should always get the nod over Foden. In this instance, a no-brainier for Rashford over him. In the longer term, unless that midfield evolves and actually can carousel the ball and retain it to any point of opposition exasperation, Foden is always going to struggle and be a moments player rather than one who is a constant thorn throughout the 90. Sancho will meet the exact same fate.

The thread may be that these players aren’t eclectic enough to adapt, but the whole point of bringing in technical marvels is to adapt to a more cultured level of football; the type that actually wins tournaments instead of being the bluster specialists who invariably come up short. It’s not a coincidence that Gascoigne and an uninjured Rooney were the last true forces England had that married everything together and made them genuinely look like contenders to go all the way.
 
Fortitude said:
I think [some] England fans, coaches and management have no idea how to process players like Sancho and Foden. It’s no coincidence they come from the same school of development, one that is some years ahead of the mean in terms of the intricacy of the play and boldness in interplay. You take that away from these players and you’re left with fish out of water mixing it with others who aren’t daring or bold enough to play in the manner that facilitates their game and gets the tune out of them that earned them the plaudits in the first place.

England’s football is still limited; more about driving, athletic individuals than the collective, which is why certain players are destined to thrive and others to look like half the player they are in the correct environment. That lack of interplay is a death knell for Foden. He needs it, desperately. He cannot powerfully run through swathes of men who are faster and stronger than he is; he needs the give and goes; he needs that daring in the build up that enables him to sneakily find space between the lines. If it’s all base play with driving runs and weak turnovers, he is absolutely destined to be a peripheral figure because there’s no real inlet for him to get involved in the play. Call that a fault of his if you want. The reality is that the staff and manager either have no clue how to incorporate that kind of player, or simply don’t want to.

The way England currently play, an athletic pace player should always get the nod over Foden. In this instance, a no-brainier for Rashford over him. In the longer term, unless that midfield evolves and actually can carousel the ball and retain it to any point of opposition exasperation, Foden is always going to struggle and be a moments player rather than one who is a constant thorn throughout the 90. Sancho will meet the exact same fate.

The thread may be that these players aren’t eclectic enough to adapt, but the whole point of bringing in technical marvels is to adapt to a more cultured level of football; the type that actually wins tournaments instead of being the bluster specialists who invariably come up short. It’s not a coincidence that Gascoigne and an uninjured Rooney were the last true forces England had that married everything together and made them genuinely look like contenders to go all the way.
Click to expand...
A lot of truth here.
 
IMO no player should be considered a "starter, " the team should be selected on the basis of who the opposition is and how they generally play, Rashford is usually hopeless against deep lying teams because his speed gets negated, Foden's control in tight pockes of space is way more suited to such a scenario, he needs to be tried as a 10, I think he may be too lightweight but unless he's tried we'll never know, these are just examples, some games you may want a Henderson/Rice type combination and other only need one of them (Henderson's time is up, I;m using his type/style as an example)
 
Fortitude said:
I think [some] England fans, coaches and management have no idea how to process players like Sancho and Foden. It’s no coincidence they come from the same school of development, one that is some years ahead of the mean in terms of the intricacy of the play and boldness in interplay. You take that away from these players and you’re left with fish out of water mixing it with others who aren’t daring or bold enough to play in the manner that facilitates their game and gets the tune out of them that earned them the plaudits in the first place.

England’s football is still limited; more about driving, athletic individuals than the collective, which is why certain players are destined to thrive and others to look like half the player they are in the correct environment. That lack of interplay is a death knell for Foden. He needs it, desperately. He cannot powerfully run through swathes of men who are faster and stronger than he is; he needs the give and goes; he needs that daring in the build up that enables him to sneakily find space between the lines. If it’s all base play with driving runs and weak turnovers, he is absolutely destined to be a peripheral figure because there’s no real inlet for him to get involved in the play. Call that a fault of his if you want. The reality is that the staff and manager either have no clue how to incorporate that kind of player, or simply don’t want to.

The way England currently play, an athletic pace player should always get the nod over Foden. In this instance, a no-brainier for Rashford over him. In the longer term, unless that midfield evolves and actually can carousel the ball and retain it to any point of opposition exasperation, Foden is always going to struggle and be a moments player rather than one who is a constant thorn throughout the 90. Sancho will meet the exact same fate.

The thread may be that these players aren’t eclectic enough to adapt, but the whole point of bringing in technical marvels is to adapt to a more cultured level of football; the type that actually wins tournaments instead of being the bluster specialists who invariably come up short. It’s not a coincidence that Gascoigne and an uninjured Rooney were the last true forces England had that married everything together and made them genuinely look like contenders to go all the way.
Click to expand...

For the most part you are not wrong but Saka shone yesterday individually and combining with Kane, showing it's possible to shine in this England set up for Foden.
 
Fortitude said:
I think [some] England fans, coaches and management have no idea how to process players like Sancho and Foden. It’s no coincidence they come from the same school of development, one that is some years ahead of the mean in terms of the intricacy of the play and boldness in interplay. You take that away from these players and you’re left with fish out of water mixing it with others who aren’t daring or bold enough to play in the manner that facilitates their game and gets the tune out of them that earned them the plaudits in the first place.

England’s football is still limited; more about driving, athletic individuals than the collective, which is why certain players are destined to thrive and others to look like half the player they are in the correct environment. That lack of interplay is a death knell for Foden. He needs it, desperately. He cannot powerfully run through swathes of men who are faster and stronger than he is; he needs the give and goes; he needs that daring in the build up that enables him to sneakily find space between the lines. If it’s all base play with driving runs and weak turnovers, he is absolutely destined to be a peripheral figure because there’s no real inlet for him to get involved in the play. Call that a fault of his if you want. The reality is that the staff and manager either have no clue how to incorporate that kind of player, or simply don’t want to.

The way England currently play, an athletic pace player should always get the nod over Foden. In this instance, a no-brainier for Rashford over him. In the longer term, unless that midfield evolves and actually can carousel the ball and retain it to any point of opposition exasperation, Foden is always going to struggle and be a moments player rather than one who is a constant thorn throughout the 90. Sancho will meet the exact same fate.

The thread may be that these players aren’t eclectic enough to adapt, but the whole point of bringing in technical marvels is to adapt to a more cultured level of football; the type that actually wins tournaments instead of being the bluster specialists who invariably come up short. It’s not a coincidence that Gascoigne and an uninjured Rooney were the last true forces England had that married everything together and made them genuinely look like contenders to go all the way.
Click to expand...
I see what you're saying. But I don't think a supposedly great player should only be able to play in one style. They're technical good, but surely they need to be tactically flexible, as well.
 
Marwood said:
One or two are yeah in each tournament squad. Saka agree is the obvious one this time and that's why he starts.

But I still don't think there's a real case for Rashford or Maddison starting. Both have struggled for a while now with a bit of an improvement this season. Not enough to displace guys playing consistently well.

In terms of subs though, I do think Rashford should have been on earlier.
Click to expand...

Maddison hasn't been struggling. He was great last season for Leicester, also - 12 goals & 8 assists in 35 games. This season he has 7 goals & 4 assists in 13 games. This guy is on the up turn and really should have been given a chance by Southgate.

Not playing an attacking midfielder blunts the team's attack.
 
mav_9me said:
For the most part you are not wrong but Saka shone yesterday individually and combining with Kane, showing it's possible to shine in this England set up for Foden.
Click to expand...
Saka is primarily an individualistic powerhouse. Fast, agile, great acceleration and the simple threat he’ll do a player with outright athleticism. It means get tight on him and you‘re in for a physical tussle he is more than equipped to win or draw dangerous fouls from; stay off him, and he can play well enough to generate the kind of interplay you mention.

Ideally, you want that in all of your attackers, especially those in the wider positions, but not every player is blessed in this way and so they need the team to be inclusive and interactive to get themselves into the game because they simply don’t have the tools to square up 1on1 with such a threat. Foden will need more connective play to really display his true self for the national team. He’ll never get that under Southgate or any kind of regressive manager who doesn’t appreciate that kind of clever interplay between the forward line and the midfield as well as the full-backs flanking. Sancho is even less athletic than Foden, so this is even more of an issue for him, but both are way out of their element in the England side we see out there.
 
Last edited:
Lecland07 said:
Maddison hasn't been struggling. He was great last season for Leicester, also - 12 goals & 8 assists in 35 games. This season he has 7 goals & 4 assists in 13 games. This guy is on the up turn and really should have been given a chance by Southgate.

Not playing an attacking midfielder blunts the team's attack.
Click to expand...

True Maddison was good last season as well.

I don't watch Leicester every week but does he play off the left? Because that's where Foden plays for England if we're talking about Maddison as an alternative.

And ultimately Foden was probably only playing because of Sterlings situation.
 
Marwood said:
True Maddison was good last season as well.

I don't watch Leicester every week but does he play off the left? Because that's where Foden plays for England if we're talking about Maddison as an alternative.

And ultimately Foden was probably only playing because of Sterlings situation.
Click to expand...

Recently, he has been playing on the right. But it is either there or attacking midfield.
 
DixieDean said:
I see what you're saying. But I don't think a supposedly great player should only be able to play in one style. They're technical good, but surely they need to be tactically flexible, as well.
Click to expand...
You’ll find it’s a greater issue for those who are not athletically gifted as they need an inlet that caters to their physical limitations far more than those who can ‘get by’ well outside of their preferred playing style. Basically, your team has to better at actually playing football to accommodate them.

A far greater talent in Scholes was a peripheral figure for England, too. They had no idea how to utilise a player who was performing at far higher levels with his club than England ever reached during his era.
 
Foden is a good player but I feel he is a victim of unrealistic expectations. I used to watch La Liga 2003-2007. Back then we got one or two games every week on the free network and would watch every team. That makes you understand football and learn to spot true talent when you look at teams other than the Elite.

I remember watching Zaragoza. 2004/05 & 2005/06 they ended up 12th in back to back seasons but they were nevertheless a very good team. 2004/05 their top scorer was a man called David Villa who earned a transfer to top 4 team Valencia. 2005/06 their top scorer was a man called Diego Milito who earned a transfer to Genoa, proved himself once more and earned a move to Inter Milan.

Villa was 24, Milito 26. I feel today too many players like Foden are expected to carry club and national team at 19 years old without having first carried a mid table team. Reason someone like de Bruyne is great is because he carried Werder Bremen, then Wolfsburg and finally arriving at Manchester City at 24. Even then he was not expected to carry the team until 26-27 when Silva slowed down.
 
I actually think a better fit for him would be the Henderson role for NT.

But knowing England's deep mistrust of any potential tempo central midfielders he'll probably continue on left for many years to come with mixed results.
 
Lecland07 said:
Recently, he has been playing on the right. But it is either there or attacking midfield.
Click to expand...

He's not a Foden or Sterling replacement then really. Last thing we need is to go back to playing players out of position.

If Maddison is to be in the team its in place of one of the three midfielders. Which would be a big shout.
 
jeff_goldblum said:
I think I might have said this before, but he's missing the physical attribute that would allow him to make full use of his technical ability. If he was stronger and/or had more of a burst of pace he'd be fantastic.
Click to expand...

Nonsense, plenty of technical masters weren’t overly physical. Unless he plans on forever being a winger (which would be stupid, he’s clearly meant to play in the middle).
 
Foden is clearly meant for an attacking 8 role (or a 10 in some systems) but England and Southgate will never allow that considering they are generally allergic to midfielders that don’t involve a lot of physical graft or power.

He also probably doesn’t work with Bellingham in the same midfield, as Jude is a final 3rd type midfielder and not a center of the park all action type (as much as people want to think he is). Will be tough I think for him to have consistent success for England while Southgate is there.
 
Valencia Shin Crosses said:
Nonsense, plenty of technical masters weren’t overly physical. Unless he plans on forever being a winger (which would be stupid, he’s clearly meant to play in the middle).
Click to expand...

It would certainly be nowhere near as much of a limitation if he was getting gametime in the middle. Wish Southgate had tried putting him in there behind Kane at some point his tournament. Out wide though he struggles to capitalise on the space his footwork affords him and defenders find it too easy to recover.

Also agree with your post above about Bellingham occupying the same sort of role Foden would shine in at this tournament.
 
Potential?
Rotating with Grealish, cruising a bunch more titles, and underwhelming in the main for England.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.