World Cup 2018

[Dan2501]

Hmm, seems like a pretty soft penalty that. VAR been so inconsistent in its use in the tournament so far. Been a few soft ones like that given but then blatant ones missed. Needs refining.

 

[Orikoru]

It was actually you that raised the subject again by posting the link, be careful what you wish for, Loftus-Cheek couldn’t produce it at a big club and Rashford has struggled all season.

What?? It's potential team news for the next game, that's all. Thought people would be interested.


That penalty for Australia was unbelievably harsh. I'm not sure myself. Seems like everyone gets a penalty in this World Cup except England.

 

[Orikoru]

Hmm, seems like a pretty soft penalty that. VAR been so inconsistent in its use in the tournament so far. Been a few soft ones like that given but then blatant ones missed. Needs refining.

Genuinely there have been like 15 soft penalties, but the only stonewall ones I've seen missed were the two England ones. Something suspect going on there.

 

[Deleted member 1418]

What?? It's potential team news for the next game, that's all. Thought people would be interested.

Which is still 3 days away! A lot can happen in those 3 days. Calm down! I won't actually care what the starting XI is - a win is all that matters not who starts and who finishes.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Which is still 3 days away! A lot can happen in those 3 days. Calm down! I won't actually care what the starting XI is - a win is all that matters not who starts and who finishes.

Thank you, :thup:

 

[Orikoru]

I thought we were here to discuss the world cup and all it's bells and whistles, not just report the facts after they've happened. Silly me.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I thought we were here to discuss the world cup and all it's bells and whistles, not just report the facts after they've happened. Silly me.

It’s a forum and we can discuss whatever the subject is so long as we abide by the rules.
Surely you didn’t expect everyone to agree with a link from internet speculation just because you agree with it.
You still haven’t answered the point from the Man Utd fans about Rashford’s form apart from your disliking for Sterling.

 

[Deleted member 1418]

I thought we were here to discuss the world cup and all it's bells and whistles

What whistles are the referees using? And do you know if the referee still uses a buzzer/bell to summon both teams out of their dressing rooms before the start of the game and at the end of half-time?!!!

 

[Orikoru]

It’s a forum and we can discuss whatever the subject is so long as we abide by the rules.
Surely you didn’t expect everyone to agree with a link from internet speculation just because you agree with it.
You still haven’t answered the point from the Man Utd fans about Rashford’s form apart from your disliking for Sterling.

It was neither for agreement nor disagreement, I just posted the article saying that potentially Rashford and RLC would start due to a 'leak' of info.

What haven't I answered? Are you sure it wasn't answered the other day when we discussed all this the first time?

Form is relative to the positions they've been playing. Sterling played right wing for most of the season, his favoured position, in an outstanding team, and did well thanks to having 6 or 7 chances a game and maybe scoring the easiest one of them.
Rashford was often played out of position out on the wing, in a very defensive team. He did ok, didn't always set the world alight.
For England, the system is different, it's a front two and a mediocre team, and Rashford fits the second striker role vastly better than Sterling, because he has the freedom he craves, and he only needs 3 chances to score (which he might get) rather than 6 (which Sterling won't get in the England team). That is why in the last several England appearances for each of them, Rashford has looked better in that role. He also has more international goals than Sterling in half the number of caps.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

It was neither for agreement nor disagreement, I just posted the article saying that potentially Rashford and RLC would start due to a 'leak' of info.

What haven't I answered? Are you sure it wasn't answered the other day when we discussed all this the first time?

Form is relative to the positions they've been playing. Sterling played right wing for most of the season, his favoured position, in an outstanding team, and did well thanks to having 6 or 7 chances a game and maybe scoring the easiest one of them.
Rashford was often played out of position out on the wing, in a very defensive team. He did ok, didn't always set the world alight.
For England, the system is different, it's a front two and a mediocre team, and Rashford fits the second striker role vastly better than Sterling, because he has the freedom he craves, and he only needs 3 chances to score (which he might get) rather than 6 (which Sterling won't get in the England team). That is why in the last several England appearances for each of them, Rashford has looked better in that role. He also has more international goals than Sterling in half the number of caps.

And yet when LP answered your post with a simple observation instead of answering or choosing to ignore him, you threw a little hissy fit.
Southgate has decided Sterling fits the role better, Sterling imo has a wider impact on a game, Rashford for me is not yet the bigger threat for opposition, yes we missed chances in the 1st half, but Rashford and L-Cheek did nothing when they came on that led me to think we’d be better starting with them.
If those chances are going to be created again, I’d rather we went with Kane and Vardy than Kane and Rashford. Vardy is more the natural poacher.

 

[Orikoru]

And yet when LP answered your post with a simple observation instead of answering or choosing to ignore him, you threw a little hissy fit.

Are you actually kidding? :rofl: I just don't like repeating the same discussion ad infinitum that's all.

Southgate has decided Sterling fits the role better

He decided that for the first game but maybe he's changed his mind? Who knows.

I feel like Vardy is only useful against better sides who defend higher so he has space in behind. In the Costa Rica friendly we saw how poor and ineffectual he is against deep defences. If he can't run in behind he offers nothing else. We can certainly use him in the Belgium game, I don't feel he'll give us anything against Panama. The stage is set for Rashford to prove he can produce from the start, really. Give him that game, if it's not a success, Sterling will take the place back for the Belgium game and subsequent games.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Are you actually kidding? :rofl: I just don't like repeating the same discussion ad infinitum that's all.


He decided that for the first game but maybe he's changed his mind? Who knows.

I feel like Vardy is only useful against better sides who defend higher so he has space in behind. In the Costa Rica friendly we saw how poor and ineffectual he is against deep defences. If he can't run in behind he offers nothing else. We can certainly use him in the Belgium game, I don't feel he'll give us anything against Panama. The stage is set for Rashford to prove he can produce from the start, really. Give him that game, if it's not a success, Sterling will take the place back for the Belgium game and subsequent games. [/COLOR]

Re-Read your reply to LP,

Rashford isn’t a poacher and Vardy isn’t one dimensional.

You’re using sentenced like “the stage is set for Rashford to prove he can produce”
It’s Panama, producing against them proves nothing, will you take it all back if he plays Sterling and he scores?
What’s the point of dropping Sterling then bringing him back for Belgium if Rashford shines? Or are you saying Southgate knows how he wants to set up?

 

[Orikoru]

You've lost me now mate. Why would he restore Sterling to the team if Rashford comes in and plays well? That would be stupid. If Rashford does well against Panama he should keep his place obviously.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Hope Peru get a result against France, that’ll blow that group wide open with all 4 having a chance in the last game.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

You've lost me now mate. Why would he restore Sterling to the team if Rashford comes in and plays well? That would be stupid. If Rashford does well against Panama he should keep his place obviously.

Because there’s a big difference to how you’d set up between Panama and Belgium and how you want your team to play.
Who knows, he might rest 4 or 5 players against Panama.
Vardy has 7 goals in 22 games, Rashford 3 in 19, if you’re using stats in your argument for Rashford over Sterling then maybe the stats say Vardy should be the 2nd striker to Kane.

 

[Fish]

Australia the better team, played some nice football, just couldn’t stick it away, would like to see them through and upset that group.

 

[Orikoru]

Because there’s a big difference to how you’d set up between Panama and Belgium and how you want your team to play.
Who knows, he might rest 4 or 5 players against Panama.
Vardy has 7 goals in 22 games, Rashford 3 in 19, if you’re using stats in your argument for Rashford over Sterling then maybe the stats say Vardy should be the 2nd striker to Kane.

I don't think he rests too many against Panama while we still need a result to progress. If anything he would put a strong team out to win it, then maybe change it up against Belgium when we're guaranteed to go through - I can already see someone like Dier coming in for Hendo in that one anyway.

You have seen Vardy play haven't you? All he does is wait on the last defender so he can sprint in behind a high line. If there's no space in behind he doesn't really offer much. Rashford and Sterling both like to drop off, pick the ball up from deep, run at players, none of that is Vardy's game at all. I think Gareth wants one of the Rashford/Sterling type next to Kane in order to create something against these sides that are going to sit deep. Against Belgium I can imagine us player more on the counter and actually trying to get in behind them, which is why Vardy could be more use in that one.

 

[USER1999]

Why has no one mentioned Welbeck? He has more goals at this level than Vardy, Rashford, and Sterling, probably combined.

 

[Crazyface]

I don't think he rests too many against Panama while we still need a result to progress. If anything he would put a strong team out to win it, then maybe change it up against Belgium when we're guaranteed to go through - I can already see someone like Dier coming in for Hendo in that one anyway.

You have seen Vardy play haven't you? All he does is wait on the last defender so he can sprint in behind a high line. If there's no space in behind he doesn't really offer much. Rashford and Sterling both like to drop off, pick the ball up from deep, run at players, none of that is Vardy's game at all. I think Gareth wants one of the Rashford/Sterling type next to Kane in order to create something against these sides that are going to sit deep. Against Belgium I can imagine us player more on the counter and actually trying to get in behind them, which is why Vardy could be more use in that one.

Good point! So he's only really useful as a threat when we're a goal up and the other team is chasing the game....so never then. LOL

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Good point! So he's only really useful as a threat when we're a goal up and the other team is chasing the game....so never then. LOL

Well done :thup: another great post reinforcing the fact you haven’t got a clue.