No-one did.but you can't say the Mexicans were better than us if they still failed to beat us.
No-one did.but you can't say the Mexicans were better than us if they still failed to beat us.
He just wasn't listening properly!papereyes wrote:No-one did.but you can't say the Mexicans were better than us if they still failed to beat us.
Tredder wrote:I didn't realise Baines was English, he's much better than Bridge anyway, no great loss
True but there is no way we will start a game at the WC with a starting XI of:Ian Royal wrote:King was awful, we fluked a win with goals a better team wouldn't have let us get a sniff of.
We also would have been punished a lot more by a better team.
King completes 90 minutes, Green makes a few top drawer saves, Milner impresses again in an England shirt, Rooney plays 90 mins, both Johnsons and Lennon impress - not quite as pointless as some would believe.Stranded wrote:True but there is no way we will start a game at the WC with a starting XI of:Ian Royal wrote:King was awful, we fluked a win with goals a better team wouldn't have let us get a sniff of.
We also would have been punished a lot more by a better team.
Green, Johnson, Ferdinand, King, Baines, Walcott, Milner, Carrick, Gerrard, Crouch, Rooney
So as a fixture it was fairly pointless.
Agreed. We know we can play better, yet we still beat the Mexicans 3-1. In fact, in terms of our entire World Cup campaign I see this fixture as very important. Capello now knows that Walcott and Glen Johnson won't work, Gerrard is totally wasted on the left, Baines isn't good enough and Carrick is just plain awful. I thought some of our passing in the second half was very good. I felt quite positive at the final whistle.Big Foot wrote:King completes 90 minutes, Green makes a few top drawer saves, Milner impresses again in an England shirt, Rooney plays 90 mins, both Johnsons and Lennon impress - not quite as pointless as some would believe.Stranded wrote:True but there is no way we will start a game at the WC with a starting XI of:Ian Royal wrote:King was awful, we fluked a win with goals a better team wouldn't have let us get a sniff of.
We also would have been punished a lot more by a better team.
Green, Johnson, Ferdinand, King, Baines, Walcott, Milner, Carrick, Gerrard, Crouch, Rooney
So as a fixture it was fairly pointless.
We knoe King can play 90 mins - problem is can he play 90mins 4 or 5 times in a few weeks.Big Foot wrote:King completes 90 minutes, Green makes a few top drawer saves, Milner impresses again in an England shirt, Rooney plays 90 mins, both Johnsons and Lennon impress - not quite as pointless as some would believe.Stranded wrote:True but there is no way we will start a game at the WC with a starting XI of:Ian Royal wrote:King was awful, we fluked a win with goals a better team wouldn't have let us get a sniff of.
We also would have been punished a lot more by a better team.
Green, Johnson, Ferdinand, King, Baines, Walcott, Milner, Carrick, Gerrard, Crouch, Rooney
So as a fixture it was fairly pointless.
Played 4 times in 15 days at the back end of the season - Man Utd (a), Bolton (h), Man City (a), Burnley (a).Stranded wrote:We knoe King can play 90 mins - problem is can he play 90mins 4 or 5 times in a few weeks.
I would guess it's because he'll get a decent run out in the next game and so those that started were given more time to impress.FiNeRaIn wrote:I thought we looked much better with Johnson and Lennon on, even if it was for like 10 mins max. Why wasn't johnson on way earlier?
As a whole though, poor performance and very lucky for a 3-1 win.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 826 guests