I don't know if there's stats available but I can pretty much guarantee he lost it more than anoyne on the pitch. Usually when a player loses the ball this often, it's because they are trying to create chances so are taking risks whenever they have it, and are either havig a bad game or just aren't very good at it. With Sterling, it isn't even that. So I'm not sure what it is he's doing. He gets played the ball, then just fumbles it back to the opposition whilst not really trying anything. For any other player it would be a nightmare performance, but for Sterling it just seems to have been accepted as the norm for England.
I haven't looked up the stats myself but, going from
@M113FF 's post, he didn't lose it that much. Also, when he has the ball under control (so disregarding the poor touch stat) I think he's incredibly difficult to dispossess. He has that Iniesta like ability to keep his balance and the ball under control when being pressed - even out-muscling players twice his size.
I honestly think all this whining about him being picked on, has created this kind of comfort blanket around him.
To make it more obvious, imagine if Wayne Rooney had been putting in the same performances for Enlgnad that Sterling has, and then imagine what people would be having to say about it.
I have been a huge critic of Sterling's in the past so I don't think all the criticism he's currently getting is him being picked on even though I don't agree with said criticism. I mean, in past tournaments I didn't want him anywhere near the starting 11 for England (this is the 1st I think he deserves to be in the first team - mainly due to lack of options, but still), and this season for City - with everyone bigging him up due to his stats - I didn't agree with any of it. I said it time and time again - take Sterling out of Pep's team and put in Rashford or Martial and they'll do as well or better than him, and Sterling would struggle for us under José.
I think Rooney would've gotten more stick no doubt, but he was not only our captain, but a proven #10, too. I, and probably everyone else, would've had higher standards for Rooney in this position in the team than we do for Sterling.
That is kind of what I'm getting at though. Expectations seem to be really low for Sterling, to the point he basicallly doesn't HAVE to do anything other than not get sent off or singlehandedly cost us the game. As if it is impossible for us to find anyone better.
In reality, we could play Rashford and have him run in behind defences more, which would alllow Alli more space and probably Kane too, even if Rashford has an average game. We coould play Loftus Cheek and push Alli fully up as a no10, which woould give us more balance in miidfielld and probably stop the centrebacks pratting around with the ball as much, since they'll actually have passing options.
Sterling isn't on a free by to just have one average (and I think that's being kind on him) game after another. THere are other players who can offer more and it's become baffling why we are not using them and actually, haven't even really given them a chance.
I get where you're coming from and, in theory, it sounds better than what we're doing now, but I think Sterling is complementing the team enough myself to keep faith in Southgate's choices. For instance, I couldn't see any other player we have in the squad carrying the ball across the pitch and setting up Lingard the way he did vs Colombia. The only other is Ox and he's out. Lingard could carry the ball but his through balls leave a lot to be desired. Loftus-Cheek has shown he could maybe do it but I still don't know about him personally.
As for your two suggestions, I do like your idea with playing Rashford and using his runs to create space for Kane and Alli, but going off our showings so far this tournament, keeping Alli in the team over Sterling isn't something I'd be in favour of. Moving Sterling out of the #10 position for Rashford would probably give us better balance, but I think - seeing as we're playing him central anyway - I'd have Sterling take up the other box to box role opposite Lingard with Rashford occupying the #10 slot. It's a shame Alli is having such a poor tournament (not that I rate him highly anyway) as your suggestion could've been ideal.
Your 2nd suggestion isn't my cup of tea, though. Loftus-Cheek has shown some promise but I wasn't convinced he did enough to be a starter, and I've already said my problems with Alli.
I've actually been impressed with our CBs playing out from the back. They've shown a lot of composure to play out when being pressed (sometimes it's too risky for even my liking, though!) and I personally think they've played some good balls inbetween the lines to our forwards. It's just, bar Sterling, the others usually pass it back instead of taking it, turning, and driving forwards from what I've noticed.
It is the general consensus yes. Alli has generally had poor ratings which I think is fair. He was ok for 30 minutes against TUnisia and grew into the game a bit the other night...but he also played for nearly an hour pretending not to be injured which was incredibly selfish, and I'm not entirely sure why he automatically came back into the team when Loftus Cheek had done well as a replacement. If Alli came back in it should have been for Sterling, as a) that's Alli's actual position and b) Sterling had been our poorest player.
Sterling is yet to be above 4.something out of 10 and has been bottom every time. For the most part I've generally agreed with the consensus too...and this is when we're winning games so people are generally quite generous with their ratings.
Fair enough! If I had to rate our players Sterling would probably be one of my lower rated ones as well, but that's because, as a team, we've done well and he's been one of the least impressive rather than being standout poor. I'd probably rate him a 5.
I agree that if Alli had to be back in the team it should've been as a #10 because he's rubbish in this box to box role, but I wouldn't have him or Loftus-Cheek over Sterling at the moment. If anyone, it'd probably be Welbeck for me. Welbeck, like Sterling, can keep the ball in tight situations and hold off pressing players, and is one of our only players who can dribble past someone as well. I know, Welbeck's a bit of a laughing stock these days, but he has delivered for England in the past and offers what Sterling does but with goals.
Meanwhile on twitter the internet warrior brigade are again giving the papers shit because one of them ran an article pointing out that Sterling hasn't been contributing much. Again, I'd love to know where these people were when Rooney was getting ripped to pieces every time he didn't score a hat trick. Or there were callls for him to be dropped because he got pictured sitting at a bar while the rest of the England team were out clubbing. Are people only interested in claiming someone is beiing picked on when they can pretend it is due to racism? It's all a bit nonsensicle to me.
Yeah, I agree that it's nonsensical. As I said, even though I don't agree with a lot of the criticism Raheem's getting, I understand where it's coming from and don't think for one second that he's being picked on.
