Sterling, Rashford or Vardy! Your choice.

Which one would you pick?


  • Total voters
    57

Slime

Tour Winner
Joined
Dec 2, 2011
Messages
20,875
Location
Surrey
Visit site
You're now in charge and they're all fit, who'd be in your team.
You can pick only one of them.

Funnily enough, I went for Rashford!
 
I ant believe I’m saying this, but if they are playing as a striker. I’d select none and go with Welbeck. Whilst his finishing is questionable at best. He’d still be a problem in the onetly box and not 20 yards short of it.
 
Crap poll ;) even for fun, why even question Southgate. Let’s just get behind the 11 he chooses.
 
I am, always, it's just that I think there may be a better option.
Just an opinion ................. shared by many.
I agree it’s only opinion, but only Southgates that matter :thup:
 
England - Played 5 games in the World Cup

Sterling has started 4 of them = won all 4 , played some of their best football of the tournament with Sterling playing well during many stages of the games

Rashford and Vardy started the other game = lost and neither played well or did anything

Quite simple really

England have got to the semi final of the World Cup - how about celebrate and enjoy instead of continuing a witch hunt against one of the players that helped get the team there
 
England - Played 5 games in the World Cup

Sterling has started 4 of them = won all 4 , played some of their best football of the tournament with Sterling playing well during many stages of the games

Rashford and Vardy started the other game = lost and neither played well or did anything

Quite simple really

England have got to the semi final of the World Cup - how about celebrate and enjoy instead of continuing a witch hunt against one of the players that helped get the team there

Some of the best football?
really?

Croatia, Belgium and France (all still in the comp) have had some much better periods, and against better teams. So I’d not use us beating Panama, Sweden, Tunisia and Columbia as some sort of justification of a player having to start. Been said in the past, but many a poor player has won a trophy. Didn’t kleberson win more league titles than Gerrard? Traore more CL than Cantona?

Ive no problem him still playing. Don’t think he’s done that badly, don’t think he’s set the world alight either. He’s an attacker and at some point needs to add more than movement and pressing to his performances. Or these questions WILL continue.
 
Some of the best football?
really?

Croatia, Belgium and France (all still in the comp) have had some much better periods, and against better teams. So I’d not use us beating Panama, Sweden, Tunisia and Columbia as some sort of justification of a player having to start. Been said in the past, but many a poor player has won a trophy. Didn’t kleberson win more league titles than Gerrard? Traore more CL than Cantona?

Ive no problem him still playing. Don’t think he’s done that badly, don’t think he’s set the world alight either. He’s an attacker and at some point needs to add more than movement and pressing to his performances. Or these questions WILL continue.

Maybe re read what i posted :rolleyes:
 
The poll doesn't show on my tablet but based on the matches so far I'd probably start with sterling but hook him for Rashford after around 60 minutes if he keeps missing his chances. Rashford blew his chance against Belgium but seems to work well as an impact player.

Had Rashford done well against Belgium then I'd have had sterling getting splinters on the bench.
 
I went for sterling. The way GS has England playing sterling fits ideally.
To play Rashford or Vardy would mean a tweak to what is proving a successful formula.
 
I went for Rashford but meant to go for Vardy. My thinking was, it's the last minute of the final and it's 0-0, if the ball gets played in behind their defence who do you want running on to it? I'd go Vardy, then Rashford and then Sterling.
 
Top