England look tired

dsoutar

According to some of the pundits. It's been pointed out countless times, I'm sure, in cycling forums, but how come people being paid millions each year with access to some of the best sports science professionals around can be tired after 2 hours of moderate exercise ?

upperoilcan

It was blatantly obvious that our players were unable to keep up the pace for the 90 mins,not just last night but in most of our games,Rooney never looked in good form (which even the pundits picked up on.)

Cosidering the Premier League is widely regarded as one of the hardest league's in the world it beggars belief that we can be so poor in these sort of tournaments.

It's a blessing in disguise that we lost last night as if we had got through to face Germany we would have been thrashed to within an inch of our lives and made a laughing stock.

rick_chasey

Not having the ball and defending is a lot more tiring than having the ball.

Given that England rarely had it for most of the second half, and they play on the break (also more tiring) you can see why they were shagged.

dsoutar

Apparently Gerrard ran almost 12 km in the 2 hours. No wonder he was knackered

napoleond

Still, terry got to celebrate just like in the champs league...

bearfraser

It must be tiring missing those penalties (again)

Yossie

dsoutar wrote:

Apparently Gerrard ran almost 12 km in the 2 hours. No wonder he was knackered

I presume you are taking the p4ss re knackeredness. 4.6 miles per hour? Errr, my 6 year can run that and still have energy to bug her brother senseless at the end of the day.

Less time on the lash getting under age girls preggers and fighting with DJs, more time training methinks. He had to be treated for cramp after 60 minutes for pities sake. First class athlete, captain of your country? Nah .........

Out played, out classed, out of the tournament.

Italy to win the Championships 2 -1 against Spain: you heard it here first lads.

finchy

dsoutar wrote:

According to some of the pundits. It's been pointed out countless times, I'm sure, in cycling forums, but how come people being paid millions each year with access to some of the best sports science professionals around can be tired after 2 hours of moderate exercise ?

Football? Moderate exercise? If you run around a lot on a football pitch you get tired - it's the constant bursts of acceleration and repeated sprints that do it. All the money in the world isn't going to change that (unless you're up to the eyeballs on EPO).

verylonglegs

This 'It's only running around a bit' seems to come up on here often when football is discussed, probably by folk who've not actually played the game to any real degree. There is more than one type of exercise and fitness.

Smokin Joe

verylonglegs wrote:

This 'It's only running around a bit' seems to come up on here often when football is discussed, probably by folk who've not actually played the game to any real degree. There is more than one type of exercise and fitness.

Yup, football is just as tough a sport as cycling.

laurentian

Given that Hodgson only had the team for a few weeks prior to the tournament and therefore a very limited time-frame in which to develop his team, he had to adopt a strategy of play that would take them as far as he could with the resources he had available. In that respect, getting to the quarter finals and taking Italy down to within a penalty of the semi-final was probably an OK achievement. But England were not, and are not, great.

Now we have the post tournament post-mortem. Exactly the same arguments and proposed solutions as the last x number of tournaments that England have bombed out of. After the South Africa world cup, we were promised a "root and branch" review of English football and the running of it. The problem is that it was the roots and branches doing the reviewing!

To me, a relative simpleton when it comes to football, the major weakness we have in tournaments is not 4-4-2, 4-3-2-1, defence, attack, possession or fitness. It is our inability to take penalties. Apart from our embarrassment at the hands of Germany in Bloemfontein, we go out of tournaments on penalties. Period. We are as good as any other team at getting to the end of ET. Teams that can successfully execute a penalty shoot out go further and win tournaments. Check the stats.

It p!sses me off so much when I hear national coach after national coach saying "it is impossible to replicate penalties". What an absolute pile of sh1t!

The penalty scenario is the one and only aspect of the game that CAN be replicated. Ball always the same size, always 12 yards away from the centre of a goal of standard dimensions. A goal keeper cannot (CANNOT!!) cover the top corners of the goal - this is where penalties must go.

Think about the game of Rugby Union. Think about Jonny Wilkinson. Kicking an OVAL ball from distances of 50m PLUS, FROM THE TOUCHLINE, with a target area diminished massively by the angle of the kick. This bloke had a 100% record in many, many games. Oh, and he did it in a world cup final.

Don't tell me this cannot be done with a football and properly motivated, professionals ("professional" means more than just being paid to do something) with the correct training.

Sort penalties, go further.

Ends

de_sisti

Rick Chasey wrote:

Not having the ball and defending is a lot more tiring than having the ball.

Why?

The players whose team has the ball still have to run to find space, make diversionary runs, etc.

postman

NapoleonD wrote:

Still, terry got to celebrate just like in the champs league...

Superb love that.

Ben6899

De Sisti wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Not having the ball and defending is a lot more tiring than having the ball.

Why?

You've never played football, right?

Jez mon

To give Hodgson credit, they finished top of the group and didn't get embarrassed by Italy.

Practising hitting strong, difficult to save, penalties would seem to be the logical solution to getting further in tournaments if the plan is to keep playing reasonably defensive football.

Having said that, it's much better to win in the 90 minutes.

jim453

Jez mon wrote:

To give Hodgson credit, they finished top of the group and didn't get embarrassed by Italy.

Practising hitting strong, difficult to save, penalties would seem to be the logical solution to getting further in tournaments if the plan is to keep playing reasonably defensive football.

Having said that, it's much better to win in the 90 minutes.

Not true.

Apart from about 10 minutes in the first half it was like men against boys.

daviesee

Jez mon wrote:

To give Hodgson credit, they finished top of the group and didn't get embarrassed by Italy.

Scouse guy next to me at work said the performance was embarrassing.
And that was with several Liverpool players on the pitch. I couldn't comment

de_sisti

Ben6899 wrote:

De Sisti wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Not having the ball and defending is a lot more tiring than having the ball.

Why?

You've never played football, right?

Wrong.

roypsb

Jez mon wrote:

To give Hodgson credit, they finished top of the group and didn't get embarrassed by Italy.

Practising hitting strong, difficult to save, penalties would seem to be the logical solution to getting further in tournaments if the plan is to keep playing reasonably defensive football.

Having said that, it's much better to win in the 90 minutes.

Do you honestly believe that?

I thought the performance was highly embarrassing. Apart from 15-20 minutes we were absolutely clueless. It was like a 1st against 4th division team.

Jez mon

RoyPSB wrote:

Jez mon wrote:

To give Hodgson credit, they finished top of the group and didn't get embarrassed by Italy.

Practising hitting strong, difficult to save, penalties would seem to be the logical solution to getting further in tournaments if the plan is to keep playing reasonably defensive football.

Having said that, it's much better to win in the 90 minutes.

Do you honestly believe that?

I thought the performance was highly embarrassing. Apart from 15-20 minutes we were absolutely clueless. It was like a 1st against 4th division team.

Italy had a heck of a lot of the ball, but they utterly failed to find the back of the net. England didn't put on an accomplished performance, but that's not what I'm saying. Fundamentally, if a few more England players could have taken penalties properly, they would have got through.

I'm saying I didn't think it was embarrassing, that doesn't mean it's something to be proud of

Smokin Joe

It's fortunate England didn't go through. Facing Germany in the semi-final would have been a hard enough task, but with two days less rest than the Hun and coming off the back of a draining two hour match it could have been a highly embarrassing night.

Le Commentateur

The Italians embarrassed themselves by not scoring three or four goals. To have ended up risking all on penalties should worry them.

Ben6899

De Sisti wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

De Sisti wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Not having the ball and defending is a lot more tiring than having the ball.

Why?

You've never played football, right?

Wrong.

Really? For points?

I've played for one or two struggling teams and one or two brilliant teams. I have experience of chasing shadows for 90 minutes, walking away knackered and I also have experience of bossing the midfield and walking off at the final whistle feeling pretty fresh.

I can't begin to imagine how much of an effect it can have at the very top level.

de_sisti

Ben6899 wrote:

Really? For points?

Yes

bobtbuilder

Le Commentateur wrote:

The Italians embarrassed themselves by not scoring three or four goals. To have ended up risking all on penalties should worry them.

To me Italy looked like they ran out of ideas when they reached England's penalty area which resulted in lots of square balls until someone took a long range shot. They didn't seem to be able to play their way through two banks of four in the way that Spain are able to with cute through-balls or clipped, angled passes.

That said, England were utter gash after the first 15 minutes. You would think it simple enough to just give the ball to the nearest player in the same-coloured jersey, but instead it became a sequence of aimless punts to a couple of players who were unable to hold the ball up.

As for when Carroll came on, it was risible to witness how easily England reverted to the "long ball, aim at the big man" tactic. World football is constantly evolving and improving and England deploy the same tactics that weren't working 30 years ago!

F*cktards! LOL.