• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

England v Costa Rica

Engerland....Engerland....Engerland....


  • Total voters
    15
Italy drew with Luxembourg before the tournament, lost to Costa Rica at the tournament and have now exited at the group stage of two successive World Cups, having won the thing in the tournament before that. How are they escaping the criticism that's being reserved for an England side that very few expected to get out of what has undeniably been the toughest group in the competition?

Some of the remarks regarding Hodgson, the players and the football on show are horribly revisionist. Pre-tournament, nobody was prepared to talk-up England and the general consensus was that we should be using the tournament to continue the rebuilding process. Hodgson has done that with the likes of Sturridge, Sterling, Barkley and Lallana being introduced to the team and built around more experienced players. The Costa Rica game is a continuation of that process with Jones, Smalling and Shaw also there.

Now we've gone out, it seems people are happy to revise their targets in order to attack Hodgson, when the reality is that he's just not the problem we have. Time and time again we've looked to hoist blame upon an individual, when really the problem is that as a collective we are not good enough. What can Hodgson realistically be expected to achieve with a group of players that have routinely failed? You can argue the case that they should be better, but where's the evidence? Because they play better in a domestic league? The two types of football are completely incongruous and shouldn't be used as a yard stick. Look at the troubles Manchester City have had in European competition despite their domination of the domestic league.

We criticise the FA for not setting a plan and sticking with it, and then criticise them more for not deviating from that plan at the slightest hiccup. It's always been the case that 2016 was to be the culmination of Hodgson's work. Judge him on the tournament we agreed to, rather than attempt to use him as yet another scapegoat for failure.

Well said. Some football fans are such reactionary fickle idiots.
 
Roy took Blackburn to last in the Prem they sacked him!
Roy took Liverpool into the bottom 3 they sacked him!

If England were a club side they would have sacked him!

I think the players are not as bad as some make out and should have fared much better than they did,Now if the players are not doing it then the buck stops with the manager.I noticed Roy holds the worst win ratio when he was Finland manager.

2 years in charge and Roy has been amazing in turning England into a tedious/boring team to watch,No panache as Roy plays his football in a dour manner with the main aim don't concede and nick one up the other end.Costa turned up to make the game not to even try and win it yet sadly England lacked everything AGAIN.


Hahahahahaha, only you can take strip a managerial career down by 35 years to present three tidbits of information out of context to form a stick for your anti-Hodgson campaign. It just makes you appear desperate, it's like you have this feeling of inadequacy and if you look for and bang on about faults, even if they aren't there, then you feel it makes you appear more knowledgeable. It's the pub bore approach that seems to associate knowledge with criticism, rather than actually taking a balanced view. Because I don't just scream change someone, I get stupid belittling 'favourite player' comments or stupid sexist remarks assuming 'I can't handle your superior knowledge cos you're a girl'. I enjoyed our to-and-fro's until then, despite thinking most of your views were tosh, but then I just lost all respect for you after that stupid comment. Well guess what, I don't think I know more about football than you because you're a girl; the reason I think I have a better view on the England squad and the way it's progressing, is because I can take a balanced view of things and not just scream change because something hasn't worked first time, and don't just bang on with the same agenda completely ignoring any balanced or thought out opinions that other posters present on here (ESB, Jam Man, YB, Beefy - not all of whom I get on with particularly well with) because it just doesn't fit in with your agenda. If you can't see any right in anyone's views but your own, then your seldom gonna be right.


What exactly were your pre-tournament expectations? Because I remember you slamming Hodgdson for only beating Moldova 4-0 away and slating the team, despite qualifying top of the group because there were some draws in there; saying we weren't going to do very well. Now we've failed to qualify from the hardest group in the campaign, it's not good enough. Have you ever not clamoured for the CHANGE IT, CHANGE EVERYTHING approach. Have you ever considered there may not be or need to be a scapegoat to hang draw and quarter. That actually, a team not doing well might be bigger than one individual? That actually a kneejerk reaction is not the best approach, and that developing our side may actually take more than two years.

The worst game of this tournament came when Roy did what you have been asking for, dropping the established names and leaving it all to the kids. Playing kids alongside kids just made players that looked like they were integrating themselves into the side well (Barkley for example) look out of depth and lost.
 
italys history is far better than ours.2006 wc champs.last euro final (i think!!),beat us with what you class as a poor team, 2-1 & hit the woodwork twice.we could be playing now,we would not have got a second...would rather be in the italian shoes(no pun!!) ,than ours..our fa never get anything right..even down to wembley...as for playing Rooney ,in the wrong place ( v italy),hodgson had 2 & half years to get that right & still got it wrong..i think a good -great manager..makes a team-player ,play better,improves them,by whatever means..tactics,bettering his skills.etc cannot say ive seen that with Roy,,might be wrong here,as i live in germany,but i believe Hodgson said ,after the euros 12,.."judge me after the wc in Brazil"
 
Hahahahahaha, only you can take strip a managerial career down by 35 years to present three tidbits of information out of context to form a stick for your anti-Hodgson campaign. It just makes you appear desperate, it's like you have this feeling of inadequacy and if you look for and bang on about faults, even if they aren't there, then you feel it makes you appear more knowledgeable. It's the pub bore approach that seems to associate knowledge with criticism, rather than actually taking a balanced view. Because I don't just scream change someone, I get stupid belittling 'favourite player' comments or stupid sexist remarks assuming 'I can't handle your superior knowledge cos you're a girl'. I enjoyed our to-and-fro's until then, despite thinking most of your views were tosh, but then I just lost all respect for you after that stupid comment. Well guess what, I don't think I know more about football than you because you're a girl; the reason I think I have a better view on the England squad and the way it's progressing, is because I can take a balanced view of things and not just scream change because something hasn't worked first time, and don't just bang on with the same agenda completely ignoring any balanced or thought out opinions that other posters present on here (ESB, Jam Man, YB, Beefy - not all of whom I get on with particularly well with) because it just doesn't fit in with your agenda. If you can't see any right in anyone's views but your own, then your seldom gonna be right.


What exactly were your pre-tournament expectations? Because I remember you slamming Hodgdson for only beating Moldova 4-0 away and slating the team, despite qualifying top of the group because there were some draws in there; saying we weren't going to do very well. Now we've failed to qualify from the hardest group in the campaign, it's not good enough. Have you ever not clamoured for the CHANGE IT, CHANGE EVERYTHING approach. Have you ever considered there may not be or need to be a scapegoat to hang draw and quarter. That actually, a team not doing well might be bigger than one individual? That actually a kneejerk reaction is not the best approach, and that developing our side may actually take more than two years.

The worst game of this tournament came when Roy did what you have been asking for, dropping the established names and leaving it all to the kids. Playing kids alongside kids just made players that looked like they were integrating themselves into the side well (Barkley for example) look out of depth and lost.

Roy has had success but not in this country his main credentials are from managing clubs abroad.

You want my respect which you had until I read one of your replies which not only was it insulting but highly dismissive ,it works both ways.

You rate Roy I don't,You think he will succeed I don't,You clamoured for Gerrard I didn't,I said we will struggle before a ball was kicked and Gerrard was not the answer you were wrong on both counts whilst I was accurate!
 
italys history is far better than ours.2006 wc champs.last euro final (i think!!),beat us with what you class as a poor team, 2-1 & hit the woodwork twice.we could be playing now,we would not have got a second...would rather be in the italian shoes(no pun!!) ,than ours..our fa never get anything right..even down to wembley...as for playing Rooney ,in the wrong place ( v italy),hodgson had 2 & half years to get that right & still got it wrong..i think a good -great manager..makes a team-player ,play better,improves them,by whatever means..tactics,bettering his skills.etc cannot say ive seen that with Roy,,might be wrong here,as i live in germany,but i believe Hodgson said ,after the euros 12,.."judge me after the wc in Brazil"


Ozzie


You are wasting your time as there are too many who clearly know far more than us put together.
 
Not really,

Roy is after all paid very well to make the right decisions and he failed in that respect against Italy yet even more incredible apart from Rooney playing central he played the exact same formation using the same midfield which to me is incompetence against Uruguay!,Most managers would have looked at the opening game then changed it for the second match yet Roy was devoid of ideas.

Yes, you're talking with incredible hindsight. You say shifting Rooney out wide to accommodate both him and Sturridge in the same team was a terrible move, but most were calling for them both to play prior to kick-off. And why wouldn't have Hodgson played the same formation? It worked well against the Italians with everyone reserving praise for the performance. The only repeated criticism was the one of Rooney, who was shifted back inside. You claim incompetence, but that was what everyone called for prior to the game. Even you.

Rooney cannot play wide left,Roy has to play him in his club position or bench him!

According to latest reports Rooney will play behind Sturridge? I do hope so!

So he did change it and pretty much followed exactly what you advocated, but we still lost. Why? Because the team's performance wasn't good enough.

I said we will struggle before a ball was kicked

Good stuff, so Hodgson exceeded your expectations then?
 
ESB,

We lost because of Roy's dire selection and tactics against Italy!
I said we would struggle because Roy was the manager and he did not disappoint.
Italy proved they were not that good because they are out.
Playing 2 holding midfielders was terrible hence the middle became became bogged down instead of progressing up the pitch.

You think Roy is the man I disagree and guess what it's a results business and the results have been bad very bad.
 
Ozzie


You are wasting your time as there are too many who clearly know far more than us put together.

my wife says i am a "thick engländer" as well,looks like she right...but all of us,you ,me,b-w,shrimpboy,esb..we all care about england,thats the main thing.different ideas,ways, but we care...as long as we have fans who care,then we still have a chance!!!some decade :clap:
 
Playing Rooney out wide against an average ageing Italian team was stupidity from Roy and playing with 2 holding players rubbed salt into the wounds,When Roy was asked if he regretted anything he replied "no".

I firmly believe if Roy had been far more adventurous against Italy we would have spanked them.

We played a front four, for goodness sake. We were too adventurous if anything.

How many teams start huge matches with three strikers and a 'Number 10'?
 
You want my respect which you had until I read one of your replies which not only was it insulting but highly dismissive ,it works both ways.

Hahahaha!!!! :hilarious:

Do you not yet see that this is a discussion board and that people are entitled to hold opinions which are different to yours, and what's more, to express them???!
 
Hahahaha!!!! :hilarious:

Do you not yet see that this is a discussion board and that people are entitled to hold opinions which are different to yours, and what's more, to express them???!


Never mind dear !

Have a very nice day and you continue being double busy hahahahahahahahahahahaha .
 
Yes Hodgson may have introduced all these young players ,which is a good thing in itself , but why oh why cannot he also introduce an exciting attacking blend of football , that not only the players will enjoy and be able to express themselves ,but also the fans world wide can enjoy and talk about. Not just this boring game paln he has at present. Yes i think all of England did not expect England to progress through the group, that give ,should have encouraged Hodgson to adopt a more attacking philosophy, but he didnt, i believe he should go take a leaf out of the Aussie coaches philosophy,just maybe we will all even in defeat say how good it was to watch,nad just maybe we will all see the players smiling because they also enjoyed the game.:thumbdown:
 
Yes Hodgson may have introduced all these young players ,which is a good thing in itself , but why oh why cannot he also introduce an exciting attacking blend of football , that not only the players will enjoy and be able to express themselves ,but also the fans world wide can enjoy and talk about. Not just this boring game paln he has at present. Yes i think all of England did not expect England to progress through the group, that give ,should have encouraged Hodgson to adopt a more attacking philosophy, but he didnt, i believe he should go take a leaf out of the Aussie coaches philosophy,just maybe we will all even in defeat say how good it was to watch,nad just maybe we will all see the players smiling because they also enjoyed the game.:thumbdown:

Hodgson can't win. The football has undoubtedly been much improved than what was served up under Capello's catenaccio style, but because we're not yet Brazil circa 1970 the daggers are out to attack his philosophy. We simply do not have the players, particularly at the back and in midfield, to go gung-ho and leave space at the back. Can you imagine the slaughtering Hodgson and the team would get if we walked into a 4 or 5-0 hiding at the hands of France, Germany or the Netherlands? There's a difference between us adopting such an approach and Australia, because Australia were expected to get there arses handed to them in their group. We were expected to struggle, but still put up a decent resistance.

No one can pretend to be happy with the showing, but at the same time expectations need to be kept in check. Revising what we expected to achieve during this tournament is simply a way of looking to undermine Hodgson and the work he's done to date.

I've always said that it'll be whoever succeeds Hodgson that will reap the fruits of his labours, and that's something I dare say Hodgson knows and understands. But we need to let him continue the rebuild and prepare the ground for 2016 and beyond. Deviating from the track now only serves to set us back a further two years.
 
Hodgson can't win. The football has undoubtedly been much improved than what was served up under Capello's catenaccio style, but because we're not yet Brazil circa 1970 the daggers are out to attack his philosophy. We simply do not have the players, particularly at the back and in midfield, to go gung-ho and leave space at the back. Can you imagine the slaughtering Hodgson and the team would get if we walked into a 4 or 5-0 hiding at the hands of France, Germany or the Netherlands? There's a difference between us adopting such an approach and Australia, because Australia were expected to get there arses handed to them in their group. We were expected to struggle, but still put up a decent resistance.

No one can pretend to be happy with the showing, but at the same time expectations need to be kept in check. Revising what we expected to achieve during this tournament is simply a way of looking to undermine Hodgson and the work he's done to date.

I've always said that it'll be whoever succeeds Hodgson that will reap the fruits of his labours, and that's something I dare say Hodgson knows and understands. But we need to let him continue the rebuild and prepare the ground for 2016 and beyond. Deviating from the track now only serves to set us back a further two years.


The first game against the Swiss away in the Euros will test the mettle of the media and the FA!,I think the clock is ticking for Roy and he needs a result in that game as a defeat will begin the media/fans frenzy.
 
Roy has had success but not in this country his main credentials are from managing clubs abroad.

You want my respect which you had until I read one of your replies which not only was it insulting but highly dismissive ,it works both ways.

You rate Roy I don't,You think he will succeed I don't,You clamoured for Gerrard I didn't,I said we will struggle before a ball was kicked and Gerrard was not the answer you were wrong on both counts whilst I was accurate!

I never clamoured for Gerrard, I said there was no point dropping him unless there was a better option. In my opinion there isn't. Central midfield is our weakest position, Gerrard is at the end of his career, his legs are going and that is allowing costly mistakes to creep into our game, we also have no younger players whose natural position is to sit in the middle to replace him. We do need to be looking to replace him, however over the course of last season he was the most consistent English midfielder, and we don't have any other players that can sit in the middle bar Henderson. I don't see the benefit in change for change sakes, and I don't see the benefit of downgrading a player as we would be doing if we put in Shelvey or Huddlestone. You say if they were playing for big clubs they would be selected as Hodgson is a yes man. They both played for big clubs, and failed to impress at those big clubs under managers you seem to think should be leading England (Rodgers & Redknapp), if they aren't good enough to hold down squad places for your golden managers at club level, then why on earth would they be starting at international level? There's a reason Spurs and Liverpool sold them to Hull and Swansea.

Gerrard is far from my favourite player, and is in need of replacing, I just don't see anyone out there that is good enough to do it. It's why he still a first team player at a top four club and his country. I also don't blame him entirely for our exit. he made two poor mistakes in the middle of the field. But the centre backs are equally at fault as the ball should never be allowed to travel from the halfway line to the goal without a challenge being put in from players employed to defend your goal. Like I said, a balanced view, being able to see Gerrard did make mistakes, but realising that he wasn't the only one at fault for the goals. Being able to realise that he is at the end of his career and needs replacing, but realising there isn't anyone good enough ability or form wise to do that at the moment.

You never answered the question about expectations, what were you're expectations for this World Cup. You labelled the loss to Italy a shambles, the defeat to Uruguay clueless. Do you honestly think you're expectation's of what England should be achieving are realisic?
 
The first game against the Swiss away in the Euros will test the mettle of the media and the FA!,I think the clock is ticking for Roy and he needs a result in that game as a defeat will begin the media/fans frenzy.

Only if the fans and media's expectations are rightly set though. Most people will assume Switzerland will roll over and die, not appreciating how good a side they are. They are a decent side with a good squad of players, if we came away from that with a draw I'd be happy, and that's coming from someone whose paying to be out there for it.
 
I never clamoured for Gerrard, I said there was no point dropping him unless there was a better option. In my opinion there isn't. Central midfield is our weakest position, Gerrard is at the end of his career, his legs are going and that is allowing costly mistakes to creep into our game, we also have no younger players whose natural position is to sit in the middle to replace him. We do need to be looking to replace him, however over the course of last season he was the most consistent English midfielder, and we don't have any other players that can sit in the middle bar Henderson. I don't see the benefit in change for change sakes, and I don't see the benefit of downgrading a player as we would be doing if we put in Shelvey or Huddlestone. You say if they were playing for big clubs they would be selected as Hodgson is a yes man. They both played for big clubs, and failed to impress at those big clubs under managers you seem to think should be leading England (Rodgers & Redknapp), if they aren't good enough to hold down squad places for your golden managers at club level, then why on earth would they be starting at international level? There's a reason Spurs and Liverpool sold them to Hull and Swansea.

Gerrard is far from my favourite player, and is in need of replacing, I just don't see anyone out there that is good enough to do it. It's why he still a first team player at a top four club and his country. I also don't blame him entirely for our exit. he made two poor mistakes in the middle of the field. But the centre backs are equally at fault as the ball should never be allowed to travel from the halfway line to the goal without a challenge being put in from players employed to defend your goal. Like I said, a balanced view, being able to see Gerrard did make mistakes, but realising that he wasn't the only one at fault for the goals. Being able to realise that he is at the end of his career and needs replacing, but realising there isn't anyone good enough ability or form wise to do that at the moment.

You never answered the question about expectations, what were you're expectations for this World Cup. You labelled the loss to Italy a shambles, the defeat to Uruguay clueless. Do you honestly think you're expectation's of what England should be achieving are realisic?


Well measured points which I will try and answer.

I thought Harry recently said Huddlestone should have stayed at Spurs?,Maybe it was not Rednapp's choice!
Shelvey I think is only 22 so wanted first team football which Liverpool could not give him.

Both players deserve at least a few caps to see if they fit into Roy's scheme of things.

I thought we would struggle as I have no faith in Roy's style of football yet the possibility of grinding out results was IMO a sporting chance as I still think the group was not terribly Diffulcult as FIFA's ranking system has been under scrutiny for some time.
 
Only if the fans and media's expectations are rightly set though. Most people will assume Switzerland will roll over and die, not appreciating how good a side they are. They are a decent side with a good squad of players, if we came away from that with a draw I'd be happy, and that's coming from someone whose paying to be out there for it.


A draw will be a good result indeed!, the Swiss are IMO a talented side who will pose many problems for us.
 
Only if the fans and media's expectations are rightly set though. Most people will assume Switzerland will roll over and die, not appreciating how good a side they are. They are a decent side with a good squad of players, if we came away from that with a draw I'd be happy, and that's coming from someone whose paying to be out there for it.

you may be right about switzerland being a good team,but what makes switzerland a lot better,in my opinion, is the manager, HITZFELD, i think he is one of the best european manager in the last 25 years...he always outsmarted that "great" manager FERGIE...we will have trouble there,we will also see how good Hodgson is with his tactics!!! have a good time in ,i think in Basel, i had hoped to get some money up myself for that game,but been ill ,all this year ,so if/when !! i start back full time august,no money and no days off..but take plenty of money with you..was at switzerland-england ,1981, lost 2-1..(in basel), was 2 years ago ,in bern, eng v italy..COME ON ENGLAND
 
Well measured points which I will try and answer.

I thought Harry recently said Huddlestone should have stayed at Spurs?,Maybe it was not Rednapp's choice!
Shelvey I think is only 22 so wanted first team football which Liverpool could not give him.

Both players deserve at least a few caps to see if they fit into Roy's scheme of things.

I thought we would struggle as I have no faith in Roy's style of football yet the possibility of grinding out results was IMO a sporting chance as I still think the group was not terribly Diffulcult as FIFA's ranking system has been under scrutiny for some time.

Its like groundhog day in here except Jason Williams has been replaced.

"Lets just try players to see" is not an approach we need to take at International level. Roy can see them play anytime for Hull and Swansea and if he doesn't think they are good enough then he won't bother doing so just in case they suddenly look good for England.

If he had played taken either of those to the World Cup he would have been laughed out of town.
 
Back
Top