Undisputedtruth

maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I was really referring to his performance against > Ukraine - he may be just knackered or have shot > his bolt for this tournament but whatever the > reason he is a spent force and, I think, a > potential liability. It doesn't matter, I think Milner is the type of player whose abilities are appreciated by those who have a deeper understanding of the game. Like a footballer's footballer. > > I think Young does work well playing behind the > striker in a central position but not as a winger > in this set-up so if included he would be better > used behind Rooney instead of Wellbeck or Carroll. Young is an experienced and versatile player. So he should play wherever Roy says.

@maxxi Milner's workrate and battling qualities led to Carroll's goal. Milner and Young are both capable players so I'll keep them. I was the first to say Young didn't have a great opening game but in the last game there were good signs of him linking up well with Rooney and Welbeck. Young's defensive qualities does leave a lot to be desired though. Balotelli is Italy's best striker according to Mancini. A player well capable of scoring from tight positions and unlocking England's defensive barrier. I just hope Italy's manager keeps this fine talent on the bench for his petulent behaviour.

England hater! ;-)

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To be honest,the Ukrainians deserved to lose for > being a miserable bunch of gits throughout. > > Who wants to watch a match of any sorts when all > you can hear is booing? I get the point of it, but > it just brings a air of shitness to the whole > proceedings. It'll be a sad day for football if fans behaviour decided the outcome of football matches, *Bob*. I thought Ukraine played some great attacking flowing football but lacked that extra bit of quality to score goals.

I'd like to see Milner retain his position for his battling and workrate qualities. The Italians have an abundance of guile and England needs to be on their guard. I don't think Ox and Walcott are able to maintain defensive duties concentration but I'll put them on once the game has opened up. As for John Terry, he never had pace in the first place and so I'm a little surprise to suddenly talking about his ability to read the game. John Terry's lack of pace means that England really can't play with a defensive line up further up the field. This in itself creates problems for their midfield in terms of positioning and the ability to dominate games. Personally, I'll keep the same side that started against Ukraine.

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For the time being. I can't see England beating > Italy to be fair, but I'd certainly love them to, > I can't stand bloody Italy (the football team, for > tis a fine place). I can see England beating the Italians. Italy struggled against a really piss poor Irish side.

Mick Mac Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Undisputedtruth Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Regardless of whether the ball crossed over the > > line or not, the referee should have blown for > > offside earlier on. While Ukraine had a strong > > case for a goal, England had an equally strong > > case for offside. The two poor decisions > together > > cancelled themselves out. > > Illogical nonsense. When the ball was kicked at 17 secs, you can clearly see the Ukraine forward in an offside position.

According to Southwark's website , decision level is subject to change based on number of objections.

Regardless of whether the ball crossed over the line or not, the referee should have blown for offside earlier on. While Ukraine had a strong case for a goal, England had an equally strong case for offside. The two poor decisions together cancelled themselves out.

Too true TED. No point in getting involved with small minded arguments.

AM, you're in no position to compare England's defence with the Irish. Absolutely no contest.

What escapes you AM, is that England were careless in given away goals while the Irish was totally outclassed. Massive difference, don't you think?

I've not set any criteria. I simply said you don't see doctors drinking tiger beer all day long and talking endless rubbish on the internet. Keep up please, AM.

Even so, you'd expect England to defend better against set pieces. Perhaps, AM could have provided defensive expertise to the Irish team.

So true, steveo. You don't see doctors drinking tiger beers all day long and talking endless rubbish on internet forums.

I wonder if marketing people consider themselves more intelligent than doctors?

El Pibe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's been a fabulous tournament so far but i think > because of the lack of a really strong team rather > than inspite of it. > The real action begins in the knockouts anyway, > but I really do think it's anyone's. I'd like to see Spain v Portugal in the semi finals with Nelson Oliveira with a start. This guy can play.

Perhaps, he's doing something more useful like saving a life.

I didn't hear anything. Where's Hugenuff these days? Usually he's on strike threads like flies on shite.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If doctors can defer sufficient pay from the > public purse to generate a 100k a year pension, > then we'd have to ask whether they're currently > being overpaid? They're no more overpaid than marketing people like Hugo. At least Doctors do something useful like saving lives.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > As previously mentioned there were very leaky when > it came to bearded middle aged defenders and shots > from outside the area. Apart from that it a great > barrier. As I said before, the goals conceded were the result of poor marking and poor defensive blocking, AM. And at least England have points unlike Ireland in Euro2012.

Loz, I'm not saying England are a world class side. They're not. But England have some very good players who could cause endless problems for the opposition. For example, I can't see many central defenders handling the aerial threat by Andy Carroll. I can't see many left backs matching the pace of Theo Walcott. The Ox is an exciting talent and is capable of giving a difficult time for any defender in the world. And of course, Wayne Rooney is a genuine world class talent. Having a defensive barrier of two rows of fours makes England very difficult to beat. It'll be interesting to see how France gets on with Sweden. Blanc has already been reported as not underestimating them for today's game. Anyway, I can't remember an England side having so many different attacking options. Can you, Loz?

I know what you mean about decisions. Croatia and Denmark should have been given penalties. Denmark conceded a late goal because their left back was caught ball watching. Schoolboy stuff really. While Germany definitely have the best squad in the tournament, they have makeshift right backs and do not seem to handle crosses particularly well. Spain will find it difficult to score against a better side. You would expect Italy to score a hatful of goals against the Irish.

Germany and Spain just scraping through to the next round. I think England, with their variation in attack and defensive barreir, has a great chance in winning the tournament.

A Westfield, drive-in KFC and concurr with Alan Medic - M&S