England v Sweden Match Thread

Why even criticise at all.  I just don't get it, semi finals of the WC and someones not happy.    They have far exceeded my expectations (getting out the group stage).  I can see Sterling scoring the winner in the semi's maybe even in the final.  

Quoted from Gaffer58

all the experts quote his running and pulling players out of position, so as I've mentioned in an earlier message play a marathon runner who can run for 90 minutes. Also I noticed in the match stats for the Sweden game there was only Maguire and Walker who actually covered fewer kilometres than Sterling.

Clever runs that pull opponents out of position aren't just running around aimlessly!

I hope Sterling gets the winner on Wednesday, then I will realise I know nothing about football.

Quoted from Meza

Why even criticise at all.

Erm, because it's a discussion forum so discussion about both the good and bad is the whole point of posting here?

It's amazing to me that people are getting precious about discussion of the pluses and minuses of some of our players when, despite reaching a semi-final, we've hardly set the tournament on fire. Most of our goals have come from set pieces/penalties and we've hardly peppered the opposition goal.

We're a capable enough side which is well-organised, well-prepared and playing competently, but I don't think we've played particularly well much of the time and think some of the attacking players are capable of a lot more. I want to see us win, regardless of how it happens, but it would be nice to see a bit more of a threat from open play with us turning more of our breaks into good goalscoring opportunities.

Sterling is an enigma for me. He does move well, gets himself in some great positions but to often there is no end product (for City as well as England, he just gets more opportunities for City). Some say he doesn't have first touch but his chance against Sweden required an excellent touch to control the ball coming over the shoulder but his second touch was awful. Even if the keep hadn't touched it I think the ball would have gone too wide for him to score. That is Sterling, even with a good first touch he never quite looks in control of the ball.

Sweden was his best game, once we'd taken the lead, I though against Columbia most of our attacks broke down on him. He is the type of player who is obviously better facing the goal rather than his back to it.

He is not as good as some are making out IMO but neither is he as bad as some of the over the top criticism he gets. He probably deserves to be the England setup because we have nobody better there atm. I don't think Rashford has the same game although he looks a better finisher.

At the end of the day we are in a semi-final so it's not as if we can be carrying any passengers. All the players have contributed positively so far. So not sure why people need to single out a single player, as frustrating as he can be at times.

Quoted from Gaffer58

If Sterling was playing for Town with his goal scoring record everyone would be shouting for him to be dropped, international level not club, we had enough strikers last season who couldn't score, all the experts quote his running and pulling players out of position, so as I've mentioned in an earlier message play a marathon runner who can run for 90 minutes. Also I noticed in the match stats for the Sweden game there was only Maguire and Walker who actually covered fewer kilometres than Sterling.

A marathon runner would spend the game running at a relatively similar pace, in a straight line.   Sterling comes short, goes long, drops out wide, goes beyond the striker, drops in front of the striker....all at varying paces and at different angles.

His finishing, for England, is disappointing.  But his movement is not.

I like Sterling, I really don't get the hammering of him.  The lad is clearly trying and just needs a bit of luck.  The question I would ask is who would you play instead of him?  Vardy can't play that role.  Alli is already playing deeper and (in my opinion) isn't effective as a No 10. for England.  Rashford, like Vardy, isn't that type of player.  This system is working with the players we've got in, why on earth anyone would want to change it I can't fathom.

I'd certainly keep Sterling in the team for his nuisance factor alone. He's very quick and surprisingly strong for somebody with a relatively slight frame and defenders won't like playing against him. He needs to learn to try and stay on his feet in the box, however, because he's apt to go down too easily and has a reputation for it already. If he tries to stay on his feet he'll win more penalties as defenders make more efforts to tackle him. Rashford is potentially a much more threatening player with the ball at his feet but he blows hot and cold and presently isn't capable of holding up and linking play in the way that Sterling can.

On the other hand, I wouldn't have Alli in the team given his form for England when he's rarely had a good game and certainly never reproduces his Spurs form. He got the goal the other day but has been a passenger up to that point this tournament and Loftus-Cheek has shown me he has more to offer at the moment. He also retains possession much better than Alli who attempts to flick the ball on too quickly and gives away possession much too often at international level.

Sterling has always been picked by all his different
managers with England, Man City and Liverpool.

Oliver Kay,   Chief Football writer for the Times, wrote a 2 page article yesterday strongly supporting Sterling.  He highlighted 3 moments of class against Sweden in the 29th min, 45th min and 88th min.

“Energetic Sterling crucial for England”.  Sterling had the most touches in the opposition box (11)and the most sprints (46).  

I think that England lack some creativity in midfield.  Sterling makes up for that for the team with his pace, runs, movement and presence in frightening defenders.  He creates space and opportunities for others - such as Kane.