Cole Palmer...

Chunkylad said:
Southgate’s conservative approach makes Critch look like a Kamikaze manager in comparison.

Englands forward and midfield options are world class.
Click to expand...
Agreed but International football is often a chess match as the best attacking sides don't win tournaments.
 
Palmer is level with Haaland now for the golden boot. He's ahead of all the other England options, very probably.
 
I think we can find a place for Palmer in the England starting 11.

Pick the best goalkeeper and back 4, I'm guessing Walker and Stones are definitely in that the other places up for grabs.
Rice as the 6 Bellingham and Foden as 8s, then play Kane, Saka and Palmer as your front 3.
Still leaves the likes of Watkins, Bowen and Grealish in reserve.
Unfortunately Southgate will look to play a second number 6 that probably isn't top international quality and Maguire who definitely isn't.
 
gjr said:
I think we can find a place for Palmer in the England starting 11.

Pick the best goalkeeper and back 4, I'm guessing Walker and Stones are definitely in that the other places up for grabs.
Rice as the 6 Bellingham and Foden as 8s, then play Kane, Saka and Palmer as your front 3.
Still leaves the likes of Watkins, Bowen and Grealish in reserve.
Unfortunately Southgate will look to play a second number 6 that probably isn't top international quality and Maguire who definitely isn't.
Click to expand...
No way Southgate will play Rice on his own.
Secondly you didn’t mention Rashford in your list of attacking players in reserve. Despite his lack of form, he’ll be on the plane.
Nice idea though!!
 
Qblock said:
No way Southgate will play Rice on his own.
Secondly you didn’t mention Rashford in your list of attacking players in reserve. Despite his lack of form, he’ll be on the plane.
Nice idea though!!
Click to expand...
Agree, no chance of Southgate setting up like that although you would think it might just be worth a look in a friendly to see if it could work.
 
I thank that young man as i said on our group chat Chelsea has to win and score a few.
So I staked much higher than normally I would on over 2.5, 3.5 & 4.5 Chelsea goals then reinvested at H/T up to 6.5 for a profit of around £150.

Some extra quality to be wasted there by Southgate 🤦‍♂️🥴
 
Last edited:
Our weakness is defence so no way are we going into a tournament with just one defensive midfielder , especially against the better teams. This is the trouble, everybody just looks at the attacking options we've got and says we can win the tournament. Defensively we get by but against certain opposition we can be exposed.
 
PNENIL said:
Our weakness is defence so no way are we going into a tournament with just one defensive midfielder , especially against the better teams. This is the trouble, everybody just looks at the attacking options we've got and says we can win the tournament. Defensively we get by but against certain opposition we can be exposed.
Click to expand...

One thing worth remembering is the Bellingham can play 6, 8 or 10. So you can start with Rice/Bellingham as slightly defensive players and release him further forward as the game develops.
Sad thing is, Palmer still won't get anything like the game time his performances deserve, while the opposite will apply for Rashford.
I wouldn't be dropping Saka. He's as good as pretty much anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gjr
Correct Dave. Any modern midfielder can play a 6 these days. It's not a hard position. Put Foden there and he'd do it more effectively than "Hendo"
 
poolseasider said:
Agreed but International football is often a chess match as the best attacking sides don't win tournaments.
Click to expand...

The best attacking sides can and do win tournaments but I'd say that if they don't then that can only be a good thing for England.

Of all the sides with a realistic chance of winning the Euros, I wouldn't put England down as one of the more attacking ?

I'm not saying that their attacking options are not as good as the other sides but I don't think they have a particularly offensive style - some might say, that's a good thing ?
 
SEASIDE2020 said:
The best attacking sides can and do win tournaments but I'd say that if they don't then that can only be a good thing for England.

Of all the sides with a realistic chance of winning the Euros, I wouldn't put England down as one of the more attacking ?

I'm not saying that their attacking options are not as good as the other sides but I don't think they have a particularly offensive style - some might say, that's a good thing ?
Click to expand...
Those that win tournaments have a solid base with a very good goal keeper and defence(Italy/ Argentina) we don't.
Then some decent forwards.
 
A solid defence wins tournaments, Italy have won many tournaments playing like that whereas the flair of Holland in 74 and Brazil 82 won nothing. I'm not sure England are all that, not keen in the keeper or centre back pairing. The midfield is very young and inexperienced and Kane is a jinx, Munich will testify to that.
Foden hasn't done it for England, I think Palmer on the right would be my 1st choice the kid oozes quality but I think Saka will get the nod due to his work rate.
I still think France will beat us.
 
poolseasider said:
Those that win tournaments have a solid base with a very good goal keeper and defence(Italy/ Argentina) we don't.
Then some decent forwards.
Click to expand...

Firstly, given the format of major tournaments it is inevitable that they are not always won by the best side in the competition.

Major tournaments can be won by teams with a very expansive style (Brazil 1970 WC, I think most would say the most attacking side in the comp) or by a very organised side (Greece 2004 Euros, I think most would say they were nowhere near the best side in the comp) and I guess more often than not by a side somewhere in between.

Apologies for going on pool, I'm not telling you anything that you didn't know and my first post should have just said, "Southgate is sh1te" in short or maybe that if England do win the Euros it will be despite having a very limited and certainly safety first coach and not as a result of an inspirational coach who bettered the players available to him.

All in my opinion of course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gjr
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top