Raheem Sterling
- Thread starter MyOnlySolskjaer
- Start date
Meant Lingard.Ah yes, City getting to 100 points was all on Pep, the players did nothing and these 5 games are what proves it. We all know that the only difference between club football and international football are the managers.
Also, this might come as a shock to you, but City can have superior players while also having a a superior manager. That's how they had a record breaking season in the first place, best squad in the league and best manager in the league.
anyway, I thought Sterling was ok yesterday, made some decent intelligent runs into the channels but the midfield either didn't see the runs or didn't have the confidence to play the ball, think it was possibly a combination of both.
Colombia are a decent defensive side, thought Lingard did ok too, disciplined performance to not let runners get beyond him and helped Henderson out by being available when the Colombians decided to press, only weak spot was Alli who doesn't look fit. I'd probably stick with the same 11 against Sweden if Young isn't injured to see if Alli can get into the game. I still think Rashford looks better coming off the bench against tired legs, doubt I'd start with him in the next game.
Colombia are a decent defensive side, thought Lingard did ok too, disciplined performance to not let runners get beyond him and helped Henderson out by being available when the Colombians decided to press, only weak spot was Alli who doesn't look fit. I'd probably stick with the same 11 against Sweden if Young isn't injured to see if Alli can get into the game. I still think Rashford looks better coming off the bench against tired legs, doubt I'd start with him in the next game.
Sterling needs to be dropped for the Sweden game! Imagine him stepping up to take the penalty Rashford took!
Either replace him straight up with Rashford or bring Loftus-Cheek into a 3 man midfield consisting of himself and Lingard slightly more advanced and Henderson sitting. Then put Alli just behind Kane as a second striker. So basically like a diamond shaped midfield as shown below:
-------- Henderson --------
-- Lingard -------- Cheek---
----------- Alli ------------
---------- Kane -----------
Either replace him straight up with Rashford or bring Loftus-Cheek into a 3 man midfield consisting of himself and Lingard slightly more advanced and Henderson sitting. Then put Alli just behind Kane as a second striker. So basically like a diamond shaped midfield as shown below:
-------- Henderson --------
-- Lingard -------- Cheek---
----------- Alli ------------
---------- Kane -----------
He's been poor but I think you need him. He has a big performance in him. He has that spark that will unlock a defence.
I find these comments odd as if Sterling is so good at keeping and shielding the ball, how comes he very noticeably gives the ball away cheaply more often than anyone else on the pitch?
Last night in the first half was especially bad. I've never seen a player lose the ball so often despite not trying to do anything with it. Usually when you have players giving up possession this often, it's because they are trying to create chances or openings, so are taking risks on the ball that aren't coming off...with Sterling you don't see any of this, but he isn't keeping possession either, so what IS he doing? He just takes it and fumbles the ball back to the other team.
You don't play Rashford as a number 10, but you don't play Sterling as one either. It just seems to boil down to pretending he is playing well when he isn't, or hoping he'll for some reason magically put in a good performance in a role which he literally never has, and where he isn't even trying to do the things that would constitute a good performance. If he is trying and it isn't coming off, fair enough, up to a point...but he isn't.
He's been the lowest rated England player by fans on the BBC website, for every game, by a distance. So it's not just on here that people notice. Either everyone watching England is wrong or he is just playing badly.
What evidence is there to support this?
He's never once played well in that role for England and Man City don't even play him in it as they have De Bruyne and Silva.
Rashford can win you a game, or Loftus Cheek can give you a better midfield platform to win the game. Sterling will just carry on doing what he does every time he plays for England. You don't play someone 1,000 times in the hope that in one of those games they play well, and the rest of your team can carry them through the other 999.
Far bigger targets to pick on after last night but let's go for the easy target. Alli and Lingard were pretty much anonymous and when Sterling went off, the gap between the midfielders and the forward line was massive.
Lingard had an opportunity to square to Sterling late on in the game just before Sterling was subbed and Lingard fluffed it and hit the 1st man. Sterling would have been murdered for that
Lingard had an opportunity to square to Sterling late on in the game just before Sterling was subbed and Lingard fluffed it and hit the 1st man. Sterling would have been murdered for that
I think Sterling has been OK and deserves to start ahead of Rashford and Vardy. He provides a good outlet, can run the channels and take on his man, can drop deep to pick up the ball, also has the pace to run in behind, and has a few tricks to put the defense on the back foot. Shooting is still way off but Kane more then makes up for that.
I hope he gets a goal(s) to get people off his back, he's doing a decent job for the team.
I hope he gets a goal(s) to get people off his back, he's doing a decent job for the team.
All he’s doing is what any forward is expected to do, nothing more. 41 games for England and 2 goals scored. Would any other forward get away with a record like that and still have people making excuses for him?
I think Trippier has been far more of an offensive threat than Sterling.
Sterling it feels like he hasnt done anything vs Colombia, key passes? Nope. Successful take ons? Nope. Goals? Nope. Assists? Nope. But do you change a winning combination?
Sterling it feels like he hasnt done anything vs Colombia, key passes? Nope. Successful take ons? Nope. Goals? Nope. Assists? Nope. But do you change a winning combination?
Last edited:
I didn't realise how bad he was. I don't think he's done a single thing right yet
He was ok vs Tunisia, certainly not blazing a trail but he was ok, still no end product however, lots of neat dribbling but nothing to show for it. And is dispossessed far too often, 5 times in that game alone. Everyone else combined lost the ball a total of 8 times.
He can't seem to kick a ball properly.
It's bizarre. His finishing, especially for England, is awful.
It's bizarre. His finishing, especially for England, is awful.
How is he the easy target? He was the worst player on the pitch. Agree that Alli was poor to the point of anonymity, but at least wasn't as detrimental. Stuff wasn't coming off for Lingard either but he didn't sour the whole game in terms of play like Sterling did.
Would've only been a bigger deal made if it was Sterling because he's been awful the whole World Cup.
What I find fascinating is that he isn't the only City player who when plays for the NT looks much worse than at club level.
Bernardo Silva is also another example, even David Silva didn't looked influential, De Bruyne has a different role for Belgium, Sane when played for Germany also looked totally lost, maybe its the Guardiola system who takes the best from this players.
Yeah all three of Lingard, Sterling and Alli were poor vs Colombia, but agree the others have had periods of good play, Sterling hasnt, he has had some passages of ok play and the rest has been poor.
The victimisation cries every time he gets fairly criticised are extremely tiring. This is a thread about Sterling so why are people going to come in it to comment on the performances of other players?
We had a huge gap between midfield and up front because Southgate moved Kane into midfield and left Vardy on his own. He also took Alli off and replaced him with Dier who sat about 50 yards further back, so presumably this was on purpose.
Sterling was really poor. He contributes nothing one game after another. This doesn't apply to anyone else in the England team currently, which is why sterling is the one people talk about losing his place. Nothing at all to do with him being an easy target, which is a pathetic logic. Everyone is an easy target when you are sitting behind a computer screen.
Sterling was far from the worst player. It's like reading a Daily Mail article about him in here. Kane spent the game either in midfield or on the wings, leaving Sterling alone up top. Lingard had a worse game, as did Alli, and comfortably. The consensus seems to be 'start Rashford instead', yet when Southgate did that he missed a 1v1 and nothing else.
I'm not saying he's been brilliant, he hasn't, but maybe he would be doing better if he was playing wide and if he wasn't scared of being blasted all over the media for every over analysed misstep he might take.
I'm not saying he's been brilliant, he hasn't, but maybe he would be doing better if he was playing wide and if he wasn't scared of being blasted all over the media for every over analysed misstep he might take.
He wasn't better than Lingard, I do agree with you though that he has a very difficult job in this England side. Sterling simply isn't a striker, and the way Kane plays means he almost has to play like one. Id rather start Rashford or Vardy next to Kane because they are natural forwards. Maybe sterling could take Allis place? He doesn't really look fully fit.
I think slating every player around Sterling won't help you get your point across to people though, so far Lingard and Rashford have contributed more than Sterling.
Hopeless.
Ridiculous lack of body strength.
Ridiculous lack of body strength.
Only Alli was as bad as him last night and through the tournament but hes injured. I really want Sterling to show his best form for England as hes very talented. The sad fact is that he usually brings his worst form. It was probably Italy WC14 the last time he turned up..
I'd replace him with Alli and stick Vardy on the left. Bring Rashford on after an hour.
Brutal really. All he has is his speed. No decision making ability at all.
Except a lot of the criticism is not just this tournament in a microcosm, it is based on his game form over the course of his career, 41 appearances 2 goals. You cannot paint this in a good light, nor do I believe Alli and Lingard were comfortably worse. All were about the same in their impact on the game and equally poor. But at least you can look at them and say that during this tournament they have had good passages of play, Sterling has not.
Yes he is not playing his normal position, and looks out of sorts, Id say ok that is fine, lets find someone who can play that position.
Regarding that picture of Sterling, I'm not clear on the rules whether that's okay to post here or not. Apologies if I shouldn't be linking images.
It's OK to post that in context, but if you are suggesting that he rode that challenge and came out on top, you are wrong.
I think he's a brilliant player.
What a stupid comment. Go back to Bluemoon, if you want to compare this forum to that vile and racist shithole of a website/newspaper.
I've no patience for opposition posters who keep on criticising the Caf and then keep on coming here like weirdos.
It's been three or four years since he last scored an international goal, that's a pretty pathetic record and he's been comfortably amongst England's worst players in this tournament.
He's being poor in this tournament, if anyone wants to compare this observation of him to the coverage he received by Sun, DailyMail etc then they are idiots. Its as simple as that. Not only they're making false equivalences but they're also trivialising racism.
I can't speak for BluemoonOutCast but nowhere in his comment did he even imply that the Red Cafe comments were racist. However, I tend to agree with him in that there appears to be a desire here to have a scapegoat, even though England are through to the quarter-finals playing their best football in a tournament for over twenty years. For what its worth the DM produced an article scapegoating Sterling within minutes of the final whistle (pulled now because of the outcry). I think the comparison is valid.
With regards to Sterling, in my opinion, its beyond ridiculous to describe him as England's worst player. All the good football England have played has occurred when he's been on the pitch. Even yesterday, the team's balance became fundamentally worse as soon as he went off. No one would describe his performances are superb but what he brings to the team has allowed the entire unit to function in a progressive and efficient manner. As an England fan I can can only thank my lucky stars that Southgate seems to have a good tactical knowledge and I suspect the only change for the Sweden game will be if Alli is not fit.
I feel slightly sorry for Rashford as it could be argued he deserves more minutes but to my mind Rashford (and definitely not Vardy) cannot replicate Sterling's role and lets not forget that Rashford had a chance against Belgium and his overall performance did not warrant a starting position. Likewise I though Lingard did not influence the game with his actual touches yesterday, however, he definitely needs to remain in the side because of the overall balance and not be dropped.
With regards to Sterling, in my opinion, its beyond ridiculous to describe him as England's worst player. All the good football England have played has occurred when he's been on the pitch. Even yesterday, the team's balance became fundamentally worse as soon as he went off. No one would describe his performances are superb but what he brings to the team has allowed the entire unit to function in a progressive and efficient manner. As an England fan I can can only thank my lucky stars that Southgate seems to have a good tactical knowledge and I suspect the only change for the Sweden game will be if Alli is not fit.
I feel slightly sorry for Rashford as it could be argued he deserves more minutes but to my mind Rashford (and definitely not Vardy) cannot replicate Sterling's role and lets not forget that Rashford had a chance against Belgium and his overall performance did not warrant a starting position. Likewise I though Lingard did not influence the game with his actual touches yesterday, however, he definitely needs to remain in the side because of the overall balance and not be dropped.
Again with the false equivalencies. Why is even he getting scapegoated then? Henderson is Liverpools captain, he's not getting much criticism on here. Stones and Walker are both City players and they're not getting criticism on this board either for their WC performances.
According to City fans, the only reason why he's getting panned for his performances here and also the lowest rated on BBC player ratings(trusting @noodlehair on this, haven't checked it myself) is because he's being scapegoated and has nothing to do with him being poor.
I see you've also ignored the bit about how he's had 2 goals in 40 appearances for England, but yeah keep on going with the scapegoating bit. The delusion and the victim complex is strong.
He's scored 2 goals in 41 appearances, against Lithuania and Estonia, and he's getting close to 3 years without a goal at all. I don't even think he's played well for England since the game against Italy at the last World Cup so that's 4 years ago.
It's a fecking dreadful record.
To insinuate people on here have an ulterior motive for criticising Sterling is ridiculous.
It's a fecking dreadful record.
To insinuate people on here have an ulterior motive for criticising Sterling is ridiculous.
While Sterling has had a poorish world cup lets be honest.
Sky Sports player ratings - Alli, Lingard and Sterling all 7's
Daily Mail player ratings - Lingard 7, Sterling 6.5, Alli 6
BBC player ratings - All 3 gets 5's
Independant Player Ratings - All 3 gets 6's.
The Guardian - Lingard 6, Sterling 6, Alli 5.
Can't be arsed looking at more but from those Lingard gets an average of 6.2, Sterling 6.1, Alli 5.8. He was no worse or better than any of the other attackers yesterday despite a poor start to the game.
Sky Sports player ratings - Alli, Lingard and Sterling all 7's
Daily Mail player ratings - Lingard 7, Sterling 6.5, Alli 6
BBC player ratings - All 3 gets 5's
Independant Player Ratings - All 3 gets 6's.
The Guardian - Lingard 6, Sterling 6, Alli 5.
Can't be arsed looking at more but from those Lingard gets an average of 6.2, Sterling 6.1, Alli 5.8. He was no worse or better than any of the other attackers yesterday despite a poor start to the game.
You really should stop crying about 'false equivalencies' whenever some posts a reply that you don't agree with.
It seems clear to me that some of the UK media enjoy having a scapegoat as that sort of lowest common denominator journalism seems to sell papers/attract clicks. Its Sterling at the moment, its been others in the past, including Beckham. Do you disagree with this?
As for this thread? I can't speak for the other posters but there has to be some reason why there is such an illogical and vehement condemnation of Sterling's performances. (I see on the England thread that most Utd fans are putting Sterling in their side for Sweden so perhaps this is just a thread for venting?). Maybe they genuinely believe it, maybe they are just sheep, maybe its because he plays for City and is keeping out Rashford, maybe they just don't really understand football? I would suggest that rather than a BBC social media experiment one of the best indicators will be the likelihood of Southgate dropping Sterling. Do you think this is likely? I would suggest there is virtually no chance of Sterling being dropped as, and I said this originally, he is integral to the team's success. So if its so obvious that Sterling is poor, why is his manager, who stands or falls by his decisions so keen on him?
There is no delusion or victim complex from me. My original post was completely balanced. Victim complex? I think Sterling is quite comfortable with his current position, as a City fan, I am equally happy with Sterling.
With regards to his overall goal record I am struggling to understand how that is relevant to the remainder of the World Cup.
How do you not see how that's relevant?
He's been playing like shit for England for years and years, he's come into this World Cup and once again he's played like shit. Maybe he'll shock us all and produce something in the next game but considering his general level of performances for England it's unlikely. Not impossible, because I do think he's a good player, but it's unlikely.
It's got feck all to do with him playing for City, you don't see people on here calling for Stones to be dropped and Jones brought in do you?
Rashford should be in for Sterling against Sweden. How many times has Rashford had the chance to link up and play with Kane?
Sterling has had countless and doesn't create nor score enough in the role.
Sterling has had countless and doesn't create nor score enough in the role.
Their players are not that superior.
That's my entire point. I see our squads as evenly matched or thereabouts. The reason the gap was massive is because Pep maximized every single City player and Jose didn't maximize every single United player.
Though I've had this opinion before the WC and the WC has just strengthened it considering how terrible some City players have been.
I honestly don't remember seeing Sterling lose the ball that much. I remember Colombian players all over him whenever he received the ball between the lines and still keeping it under control, which I thought was very impressive considering the size difference.
Like you said, he didn't really contribute much attacking wise (no one did bar Kane really), but he did play a nice ball to Lingard on the counter in which Lingard should've done better with. Then again, I was a bag of nerves watching it and some moments flew past me so it's entirely possible that I'm misjudging his performance.
I completely agree with you in that, at this point, I wouldn't play either Rashford or Sterling as 10s (though I think Rashford could do well in said position one day) but, for the formation Southgate seems intent on sticking with, I get why he's being played there due to his dribbling and counter-attacking threat. I know, we haven't seen him do too well in said role and it's more about hoping he'll put in a good showing there, but I get why. Thinking about it, the only player we have in the squad who's proven to be able to play as a #10 to a good standard is Alli, and he is having a very poor tournament. It's slim pickings - especially with Ox being out who I think would've been a starter for us.
I don't agree with you "pretending he is playing well" comment. We all have different expectations when it comes to football. For me, I don't really rate Sterling that high in general so, with the him also not being a natural #10, I don't expect too much from him and just seeing him keep the ball in the tight situations, contributing to our build-up play when he comes deep, and creating a chance or two is fine by me. I know you don't think he did any of these in the Colombia game but I thought he contributed myself. For some, they need more from a 10 and I think a 10 should offer more, too, but when that 10 is Sterling then I have to adjust my expectations.
I don't know what you want me to say? I mean, I'm not that surprised as I'm sure most people want a lot more from our #10, which is reasonable and I've never said that they're wrong to want more. I want more, too, but when our #10 is Sterling then, as I said before, I have to adjust my expectations. He'd probably be one of my lower rated players actually, but that's because I think, as a team, we've done well and he's just one of the least impressive rather than him being standout poor. It'd be better if we had a good #10, Alli was performing to a good level, or if we changed formation as we just don't have anyone for that #10 slot, but Southgate is intent on sticking with it. Maybe he's wrong to do so but it's worked for him so far and, in my opinion, he deserves some leeway. Said leeway might come back to bite us in the butt, but I think we should just enjoy the ride, personally.
When I think about our team, I think our three behind Kane (Alli, Sterling, Lingard) have been our 3 least impressive players so, as I said, I'm not surprised with the general feeling of Sterling's performances. In my opinion, Alli has been the worst. Lingard links-up decently with others, is a goal threat, and creates panic with his movement, and I've already said what I think Sterling contributes to the team. I don't see Alli doing anything, though. Nothing at all except trying some fancy flicks at the oppos box which never come off.
I know nothing about the BBC website so do a lot of people vote there then? Is that the general consensus of the British public in regards to our performances?