They’ve been stout in back first half, but Azzurri will break them down for at least one.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
the better squad for most of the game.
Can’t complain how the soccer gods called the match.
Penalties though are the most brutal way to lose a title of any sport.
(no message)
The bee’s knees.
Italy have really taken hold of the match. Kane seems almost passive. I understand holding up play. But man. Trippier and Shaw look inspired. Rice too had been lively. I love Phillips from Leeds. Gareth looks to have gotten it right. So far...
(no message)
(no message)
Should have tried to win it in regulation.
Italy the better team since near end of first half.
(no message)
guys in almost cold to take penalties though. They should have been in earlier as should have Grealish.
Oh well, nice run.
It was completely out of character for him to substitute two defenders for two forwards in the 120th minute, while defending a corner. That was so out of character for him but they must have practiced penalties all month and determined Rashford and Sancho were 2 of the 5 best, in his opinion. You're right though. Leaving it to the very last second probably wasn't the perfect plan, but if he'd brought them on earlier they would have been exposed defensively. If it were me, I'd have substituted Sterling out earlier for either of Rashford or Sancho but overall it's tough to complain.
A few other thoughts:
1. It's counterintuitive, but I think England scoring so early actual hurt their chances. I believed the game plan was to sit back and absorb Italy's pressure for 60-70 minutes, then bring on Grealish and go for the goal. It was the same plan as the German game. All scoring early did was intensify the Italian attack sooner. England wasn't going to keep Italy off the scoresheet for 85 minutes, but they could have for 20-25 minutes.
2. England's tactics in this tournament were spot on. Southgate set the team up to go far and they did. They have proven their defensive mettle. Now he should have confidence to open up the offense in the WCQ games. They were very limited in the attack with the Sterling and Kane. It's time to move on from both. In hockey terms, we would describe Sterling as "all Swedish, no Finnish". Lots of speed, lots of waggle, but he is just not a finisher. He's not. Compare him to Insigne on Italy who can attack with pace and shoot the ball. Sterling pales in comparison. He has zero shot. There is a reason he wasn't one of the 5 PK'ers. He can't shoot. That's kind of a pre-requisite to be a FW. As for Kane, he should never have had the ball on his foot for more than 3 seconds. He can't dribble, he can't beat a defender one on one. It was painful watching him try to carry the ball yesterday, and in this tourney. His job is to get into the box to tip in crosses with his head or his foot. That's it. That's a very limited role. And for large stretches of this tournament he didn't do this. If it's because of injury or tactics, I'll cut him some slack. But I thought he played poorly in the tournament and awful yesterday. The future of this team, I've said it before, is any 3 of Foden, Rashford, Bellingham, Saka, Greenwood and Sancho up front. There isn't a pure striker in that lot to replace Kane so they'll have to do it by committee. The committee approach seemed to work for Italy.
3. Thank you, England. What a great month's worth of entertainment you gave your fans. That was fantastic.
4. Congrats Italy. We'll see you in Qatar.
While he certainly isn’t gonna be compared to Diego or Lionel in his ability to dribble the field, he’s a top notch finisher when on, and one of the best strikers to play off of out there. Getting him going was key to the Lion’s run. Sterling is an excellent dribbler and playmaker, but simply can’t finish. Rashford should have been in for him well before. Southgate did an excellent job and this run should silence his critics. Can’t wait for the WC in 22.
(no message)