Ericksson,One man upfront.

[Leekbrookgull]

Is it me? Or is anyone really concerned how Ericksson insists on defending so deep,when leading.Playing one man upfront,just inviting the oppostion to attack you. :

 

[Icy Gull]

You are gonna incur the wrath of most of NSC, but I agree with you, the guy should be managing a team who thrive on defensive football, England patently don't.

 

[Northstander]

Its the years he spent in Italy

 

[Trigger]

It complete madness as proved on Saturday v Paraguay... Especially if that one man is the paceless Crutch.

 

[The Large One]

He is OBSESSED with 4-5-1, and will use any opportunity he can to utilise it, irrespective of whether the players are comfortable with it or not.

For me, however, the problem on Saturday was not the fact we played 4-4-2 (something he doesn't like - the twat), but more the fact that individual players were playing sloppily, and giving the ball away. No level of tactics can accommodate such poor play. This started about 25 minutes into the game - way before the second half began.

And I don't buy this bollocks about the heat. Australia played for most of the game at a very good pace, helped by the fact that Hiddink used his substitutions wisely, even if that does imply he may not have picked the best starting XI.

 

[Easy 10]

He is OBSESSED with 4-5-1, and will use any opportunity he can to utilise it, irrespective of whether the players are comfortable with it or not.

No he's not.
Sven clings to his 4-4-2 like a security blanket, hence the mind-numbing banging-head-against-a-brick-wall persistance with the Becks-Lampard-Gerrard-Cole midfield that has persisted in getting precisely f***-all from two of the best central midfielders in Europe for the last 3 years. Unfortunately on one of the few occasions he tried changing it, we were promptly raped by Northern Ireland.

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

4-5-1 is the way to go in international football, especially with the array of midfield talent at our disposal


as for inviting the the other team to attack you...did you SEE the czechs?!

 

[Leekbrookgull]

But we dont play 4-5-1, we play 4-1-4-1. Hargreaves in front of the back four.With just one up front,that allows the oppostion to release at least two players to push-on against our four in midfield. Against that sort of play,you need more than one man in front of the back four.

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

But we dont play 4-5-1, we play 4-1-4-1. Hargreaves in front of the back four.With just one up front,that allows the oppostion to release at least two players to push-on against our four in midfield. Against that sort of play,you need more than one man in front of the back four.

the czech rep play 4-1-4-1

our strength is our defence and midfield, it makes perfect sense to play to our strengths and pack the midfield don't it

 

[Simster]

I am - very slowly - coming round to Easy's point of view. Erikksson is a busted flush and a con artist. I no longer truly believe in him. I'm still scratching my head over the exclusion of a 5th striker and instead deciding to take NINE midfielders. WTF has got to go wrong for Jermain Jenas to get a game?

And I'd have more respect for his formation decisions if he was actually able to change it when it started to fail in the middle of the game. I can understand his reasoning for taking off Owen, because he rightly said that Crouch was becoming isolated as Owen wilted. But Cole couldn't do what was asked off him - something he should have established in some of the many games we played before this.

 

[Easy 10]

Unfortunately for us, Sven has somewhat painted himself into a corner with his squad, as became evident on Saturday. He takes off Owen, and what options has he got ? His big gamble of taking Theo Walcott along for the adventure understandably doesn't quite go as far as actually PLAYING the fella (he IS just an untried kid after all). So instead, we're now looking at square pegs in round holes, with midfielders being asked to play as auxilliary strikers. And if Crouch picks up another yellow, then he's suspended.

If we're winning against T&T, I think it'd be worth Crouch kicking someone up in the air to get that 2nd yellow card out of the way, so he's suspended against what will (hopefully) be a fairly meaningless game against Sweden. Otherwise, in terms of forwards, we're on a very thin tightrope for the knockout stages.

 

[London Irish]

the czech rep play 4-1-4-1

our strength is our defence and midfield, it makes perfect sense to play to our strengths and pack the midfield don't it

Agreed, playing one up front doesn't by itself make you a negative team, it really depends on the roles give to the midfielders and how quickly/ how well they can support the main striker.

Joe Cole behind the main striker is not a terrible idea in itself, in fact, it is quite an interesting one, but Sven can be criticised for not at least for trying it out in the friendlies and trying it when Cole was also tiring in the heat. Bringing the much-criticised Hargreaves on made more sense tactically and finished the job for England.

 

[Simster]

Unfortunately for us, Sven has somewhat painted himself into a corner with his squad, as became evident on Saturday. He takes off Owen, and what options has he got ? His big gamble of taking Theo Walcott along for the adventure understandably doesn't quite go as far as actually PLAYING the fella (he IS just an untried kid after all). So instead, we're now looking at square pegs in round holes, with midfielders being asked to play as auxilliary strikers. And if Crouch picks up another yellow, then he's suspended.

I don't actually agree with this. Owen & Walcott would have been a straight swap - which wouldn't have fixed the problem that we couldn't link up play and retain possession. However, I do have a problem with SGE's choice of Joe Cole in that position. He wasn't up to it and Sven should have known that by now.

If we're winning against T&T, I think it'd be worth Crouch kicking someone up in the air to get that 2nd yellow card out of the way, so he's suspended against what will (hopefully) be a fairly meaningless game against Sweden. Otherwise, in terms of forwards, we're on a very thin tightrope for the knockout stages.

Yellow cards are wiped out after the group stage

 

[Easy 10]

I actually thought Gerrard did ok in that more forward role he tried in the friendly v Hungary. Its so disheartening to see Gerrard wasted with defensive duties, picking the ball up 5 yards in front of our own back four.

 

[Simster]

Joe Cole behind the main striker is not a terrible idea in itself, in fact, it is quite an interesting one, but Sven can be criticised for not at least for trying it out in the friendlies and trying it when Cole was also tiring in the heat.

Spot on, placky.

Bringing the much-criticised Hargreaves on made more sense tactically and finished the job for England.

Hargreaves made no difference IMO.

 

[Easy 10]

I don't actually agree with this. Owen & Walcott would have been a straight swap - which wouldn't have fixed the problem that we couldn't link up play and retain possession. However, I do have a problem with SGE's choice of Joe Cole in that position. He wasn't up to it and Sven should have known that by now.

The same XI were linking up play and retaining possession for the first 45 very well though. The only thing that changed (prior to Owen coming off) was the mentality. We gave up going for the second goal, and decided to sit on the lead.

Yellow cards are wiped out after the group stage

Ooh good.

 

[Les Biehn]

First half saw England play how they should, a disciplined system that allowed players to attack, i.e exactly what we need, it allows Gerrard and Lampard to work together, stops Cole, Gerrard and Beckham playing like Roy of the Rovers and means the team operates well as a unit. It allows our natural attacking game and suppressed the natural stupidity of it.

Second half was a shambles. No defined tactical approach. Is Cole up front? Are we supposed to sit back? What formation are we playing now that blah, blah, blah has come on? It also suppressed our natural all action attacking game for a defensive mentality that the English can't play to. Eventually someone will get bored of it, push up, draw others out of position and bang we get caught by a decent team on the counter.

Sven is a f***ing Muppet who has been unable to integrate his tactically 1 dimensional mentality with that of the English game. Taking Walcott shows how weak he is, not taking other options up front shows how stupid he is and playing such defensive formations shows how little he has learnt from his time here and how conservative he is. Lets just hope somehow he gets it in his shiny head that we need to play like we did in the first half and that Owen and Rooney regain fitness sharpish.

 

[Simster]

The same XI were linking up play and retaining possession for the first 45 very well though. The only thing that changed (prior to Owen coming off) was the mentality. We gave up going for the second goal, and decided to sit on the lead.

Yep, Another world beating inspirational half time chit chat no dount.

The fact is that he need to do *something* and he was incapable of doing the right thing.

 

[Les Biehn]

He should have at least thought about changing to a midfield 5 by having two wingers of Cole, Downing or Lennon with three in the middle of Beckham, Lampard, Gerrard (maybe bring on a holding midfielder for one of them) so it at least meant we could hit the balls to the channels where we were getting loads of room, allowing us to regroup and potentially launch a counter attack.

 

[London Irish]

The same XI were linking up play and retaining possession for the first 45 very well though.

I thought England's command of the game was slipping well before half-time. For me, it was England dominating the opening 15/20 mins and then pretty even after that with Paraguay coming more and more in to the game as they recovered from the opening onslaught.