You're on Sky Sports

You're on Sky Sports

Does Germany's loss make England look better? Share your views with Jason Cundy and Tony Cascarino.

Back to story

Comments (14)

  • Page 1 of 1
  • 1

James Rooney says...

When are England going to learn that making excuses for losing penalty shoot outs are not the reason for the team getting knocked out. What it tells people who play and watch football is that England are never good enough to win the games over 120 mins with all the teams they play. They need to win the match with posiitve play not the complete negative , holding game that they adopt. They do not have the ability to keep the ball like the best teams in Europe and therefore stop teams playing. It works some times but sooner or later the bubble bursts. Change your style of play and lets face it the English based players are not good enough. The Premiership is full of foreign players how can we develope any type of youth programme.

Posted 23:20 24th June 2012

Ben Tester says...

i think england need to play a 4 3 3 formation with walcott and chamberlain on the wings and carroll upfront with gerrard parker wiltshire in midfield

Posted 23:13 24th June 2012

Adam Sheriwala says...

Just let Roy make the decisions, as long as we don't get knocked out, we all should be happy. It's the wrong time to criticise the team. However, I believe England shouldn't start with Walcott, as he will add pace when needed (towards the end of the game).

Posted 16:06 23rd June 2012

Real World says...

As usual England get through an easy group stage and think they are brazil. England are not good enough and will lose to italy, about time you idiots realised it. 3-0 to italy.

Posted 12:26 23rd June 2012

Richard Cross says...

Walcott has only impressed when playing with a old fashioned centre forward namely Heskey and Carroll to clear a bit of space for him. No Carroll, no Walcott.

Posted 23:30 18th June 2012

Geoffrey Toussaint says...

Play theo and Alex out wide play 4-5-1 carroll and Rooney

Posted 23:16 15th June 2012

Chris Rivers says...

As a nation, we're never happy, are we? Yes, football is a spectator sport and should therefore be entertaining, but if we played gung-ho, ultra-offensive football and were weak at the back then let me tell you, you wouldn't find the near-inevitable England loss too entertaining. Managers in the past tried to play swift attacking football - Eriksson, McLaren, Capello at the World Cup - but ultimately what happened was we lacked clinical finishers, we lacked pass-masters, we'd bemoan the missed shots, we'd bemoan the lack of defensive solidarity, the media would criticise the tactics/players/manager, and the entire team would be on a downward spiral due to a crippling pressure to perform. What Capello learnt was that England desperately needed to build their attacks from the back with a strong defensive unit, for which Hodgson has become notorious. You may find it "boring" or brand it "anti-football", but it is the type of football that sees us playing to our strengths for once rather than trying to imitate a style of play we can't match, i.e. Spain or Brazil before them, and most importantly IT GETS GOOD RESULTS!! The pessimism towards the English national team may well be understandable, but let's see how well we do in this tournament before grinding our axes

Posted 06:33 14th June 2012

Charlie Mcbeath says...

That's got to be the worst England performance I have ever seen, they might as well have boarded up the goal and gone for a beer. France are not a quality team (despite all the hype) so why give up the ball to them? England took too many players who have not performed this season, some have yet to show anything to justify an England call up. Is this building for the future? What happened to playing a system and picking the best form players in the country to fill that system surely that will bring better results than picking players that we hope will improve in time for the World Cup. I can see it all ending in disaster and Hodgson will be out on his ear. Boring, Negative, Defend and Hope football will not win anything.

Posted 21:24 12th June 2012

Steven Steven says...

A comment above said if we had Harry rednapp,we have played open football,Yes we would have and got beat 3 nil.instead we played to our strengths and got a good result.If england ever win anything it will be by being boring,but i dont care,were not Brizil,were England

Posted 13:44 12th June 2012

Guy Henley says...

would like to see the following formation: Hart Johnson-Terry-Lescott-Cole Parker - Gerard Young - Ox Chamberlain- Walcott Carroll (Rooney) Reasoning: Wouldnt touch the defense with current players available, however i think parker and gerard provide enough defensive support, and one can sometimes move up, whilst another stays. Ox showed how versatile he is and in ease in midfield, i would ditch milner who is average and too defensive (sometimes he is good, but not consistent), and then i would stick young and walcott on the sides who could dip sweet cross's into carolls path, and rain havok on the wings. I would start with this formation and then introduce, welbeck, milner in due course. But really when you have a player of walcotts speed, skill, and finishing to leave him sidelined doesnt make sense. ps. great decision to leave rio out, roy mentioned that he had only seniors in the back, deifnately need to give the youngsters some experience/exposure at international tournaments.

Posted 13:22 12th June 2012

Craig Stanley says...

Boring?? What on earth is he supposed to do??? We have mediocre players and he's getting the best out of them that he possibly can. Would people rather see us play free-flowing football and get smashed in every game??

Posted 11:50 12th June 2012

Marcus Jones says...

France were there for the taking. If Harry Redknapp had been in charge of that team then we'd have gone for it with some pace on the wings and two forwards and we'd have got the win. I fear it could come back to bite Hodgson further down the line. He's just too conservative.

Posted 11:48 12th June 2012

Sean Close says...

Can someone explain why the extra officials in the football stand on the same side of the pitch as the regular referees assistant. Surely, they would be far better being situated on the other side, for a number of reasons. First, if the ball was close to crossing the line but the view from that side if the pitch was obscured by a player, both officials views would be blocked, but if the extra official was on the other side they would have a clear view. The same would go for fouls and handballs where the player was facing away. Also, the extra official is actually in the way of the regular referees assistant. It makes no apparent sense for them to be where they are, please tell me why this is the case?

Posted 07:54 12th June 2012

Martn Smith says...

Carrick should have been in the squad alongside scoles this way we would have the best back back 5 plus the best central midfeilders in england and the best strike force rooney and welback up top alongside ashley young and adam johnson

Posted 22:58 11th June 2012

  • Page 1 of 1
  • 1

Latest Poll

Will Charley Hull beat Laura Davies' record of 45 Ladies European Tour wins?

View Results