Brazil 3-0 England

[adaym]

England have not got strength in depth.

[Ardemax]

gg england?

man they haven't played that well

brazil should be 3 up

[Browney]

Brown's not had a good game and neither has Jenas although he has been decent at times.

WHAT. Brown is so much better at defending than Johnson. Brown's had a good game!

[Ardemax]

1-0 final score

[CHA!NGANG]

WHAT. Brown is so much better at defending than Johnson. Brown's had a good game!

First goal. His fault. Penalty. His fault. I'd like to see what your basing your statement on?

He is a decent CB but a terrible RB. Maybe he is better than defending than Johnson. But a RB has to get up the pitch as much as he has to defend and Johnson going up is very very dangerous, and his defending isn't amazing but that's what Barry/Hargreaves/Carrick are for. To cover for him and Cole when they go up, which is why almost all of the time a Holding Mid is played for England.

[Browney]

First goal. His fault. Penalty. His fault. I'd like to see what your basing your statement on?

He is a decent CB but a terrible RB. Maybe he is better than defending than Johnson. But a RB has to get up the pitch as much as he has to defend and Johnson going up is very very dangerous, and his defending isn't amazing but that's what Barry/Hargreaves/Carrick are for. To cover for him and Cole when they go up, which is why almost all of the time a Holding Mid is played for England.

The cross for the goal was sublime. Could've landed on a sixpence. Split Brown and the other defender in 2. Against a team like Brazil they will always score pure class goals like that, because NO ONE could've stopped that. Penalty, I'll give you that, though Foster should have done better.

I don't understand why we need rampaging full backs. Chelsea use full backs like that because they have little width in midfield. We play a traditional 4-4-2. Meaning when full backs go forward, they bomb up the wings, now you reckon it's the DMs job to rush back and cover, which leaves so much space in midfield that any player could stroll through the CM positions, because we have 2 people in the winger's role. I prefer Chelsea's formation which uses the full backs, yet they always have a man in front of the CBs to sweep up and to stay fixed in his formation.

It works for Brazil because they play 4-2-2-2, with 2 DMs and 2 AMs. Again, a formation with less width than a 4-4-2, so the full backs can bomb up to the DMs, and still, every area in the field is full, by deploying a formation with no width and fullbacks.

Johnson's going to get found out. Against Ribery, in the world cup finals, he's going to get torn to shreds as he tries to be Cristiano Ronaldo. But, who am I to tell Mr. Capello what to do?

[CHA!NGANG]

The cross for the goal was sublime. Could've landed on a sixpence. Split Brown and the other defender in 2. Against a team like Brazil they will always score pure class goals like that, because NO ONE could've stopped that. Penalty, I'll give you that, though Foster should have done better.

I don't understand why we need rampaging full backs. Chelsea use full backs like that because they have little width in midfield. We play a traditional 4-4-2. Meaning when full backs go forward, they bomb up the wings, now you reckon it's the DMs job to rush back and cover, which leaves so much space in midfield that any player could stroll through the CM positions, because we have 2 people in the winger's role. I prefer Chelsea's formation which uses the full backs, yet they always have a man in front of the CBs to sweep up and to stay fixed in his formation.

It works for Brazil because they play 4-2-2-2, with 2 DMs and 2 AMs. Again, a formation with less width than a 4-4-2, so the full backs can bomb up to the DMs, and still, every area in the field is full, by deploying a formation with no width and fullbacks.

Johnson's going to get found out. Against Ribery, in the world cup finals, he's going to get torn to shreds as he tries to be Cristiano Ronaldo. But, who am I to tell Mr. Capello what to do?

In some respects I agree. Brown didn't have a good game so no idea how anyone can say that. Just look at the player ratings on SSN. 4/10 is hardly good. Brown as a RB just can't cut it but he's a good CB.

Also, I agree the formation we use on paper doesn't suit the players we have really. We should play the formation Barca uses really with 4 defenders, 2 very attacking FB's, a Holding mid (Barry/Hargreaves), two playmaking attacking mids (Lampard and Gerrard), one sole striker (Rooney) and two wingers/supporting strikers which could be: Walcott, SWP, Lennon, Milner, Young, Downing, J.Cole. Then if we score a few goals and need to defend then bring on Beckham and and turn it into a 4-5-1 or something. That's always how I feel England should play but then again we have Bent, Defoe e/c/t who deserve to play and support Rooney so it's a tricky one.

Chelsea don't have Little width in Midfield :S They have Malouda, Zirkhov (sp) and Cole who are wingers, but Zirkhov and Cole have been injured and are coming back/recovering which is why they play Ballack and Lampard on the wings. Johnson won't get torn to shreads by Ribery as Ribery drifts inwards towards the CB's so Terry, Ferdinand and Barry will cover if he gets into trouble but I see what you mean. It's a real real shame that Johnson didn't play today as it would have given a good chance to see him against the best players in the world. If him and Robinho played that would have been his first real test against a world class LW, but the whole point of playing a holding mid like England do is to release the FB's. Oh and also I disagree with your width comment. When you have two wide players in midfield and two attacking full backs it allows them to link up on the wings and get good crosses in and drift into the centre of midfield which is another tactic which common with teams like Bayern and Barca.

[Browney]

In some respects I agree. Brown didn't have a good game so no idea how anyone can say that. Just look at the player ratings on SSN. 4/10 is hardly good. Brown as a RB just can't cut it but he's a good CB.

One match isn't every match.

Also, I agree the formation we use on paper doesn't suit the players we have really. We should play the formation Barca uses really with 4 defenders, 2 very attacking FB's, a Holding mid (Barry/Hargreaves), two playmaking attacking mids (Lampard and Gerrard), one sole striker (Rooney) and two wingers/supporting strikers which could be: Walcott, SWP, Lennon, Milner, Young, Downing, J.Cole. Then if we score a few goals and need to defend then bring on Beckham and and turn it into a 4-5-1 or something. That's always how I feel England should play but then again we have Bent, Defoe e/c/t who deserve to play and support Rooney so it's a tricky one.

I think we should build a team around Gerrard and Lampard. All of the winger's non-ability to hold down a starting place shows how we should build a squad, like you said, to our strengths. So two AMs, don't really fit, leading to Gerrard hoofed of to the left. Might be better for us to emulate Brazil, then we could use Johnson and Cole, two very good full-backs, Barry and Carrick, Gerrard and Lampard all to better effect. Or, 4-3-2-1 like this...

GK
Def
Beckham - Barry - Milner
Gerrard - Lampard
Rooney

Which would eliminate the problems with selecting a second striker, but again, waste two attacking fullbacks.

Chelsea don't have Little width in Midfield :S They have Malouda, Zirkhov (sp) and Cole who are wingers, but Zirkhov and Cole have been injured and are coming back/recovering which is why they play Ballack and Lampard on the wings. Johnson won't get torn to shreads by Ribery as Ribery drifts inwards towards the CB's so Terry, Ferdinand and Barry will cover if he gets into trouble but I see what you mean. It's a real real shame that Johnson didn't play today as it would have given a good chance to see him against the best players in the world. If him and Robinho played that would have been his first real test against a world class LW, but the whole point of playing a holding mid like England do is to release the FB's. Oh and also I disagree with your width comment. When you have two wide players in midfield and two attacking full backs it allows them to link up on the wings and get good crosses in and drift into the centre of midfield which is another tactic which common with teams like Bayern and Barca.

Chelsea now play with a diamond in midfield, one DM, 2 CMs and an AM. Meaning the full backs can really go up at the sides of Ballack and Lampard. You understood me on the Ribery point regardless. Like I said, as the winger and full back get close, it leaves the full backs space empty, so the DM fills it, leaving his space free.

[CHA!NGANG]

Diamond technically is one holding mid, a RM, LM and attacking mid. Chelsea are only playing two CM's as there wingers are injured/coming back from injury. Once there all fit then I can see Essien Holding, Cole on the right, Malouda/Zirkhov on the left and Lampard on the right.

Your formation could work but then again what would happen with Walcott/Lennon/SWP/J. Cole. Walcott/Lennon and SWP can all play for England, the only reason that not one of them is constantly the RW/RM is that there all equally as good really is it's a hard choice to make.

I like your formation kind of though except I'd put J. Cole on instead of Milner. I agree we should only play 1 striker. Would solve a lot of problems although Bent/Defoe are decent players.

Oh and as for Brown you said that he is played good today and you were talking about this one match so I was saying he played poorly this match. But in general I don't think he's a good RB. He doesn't really get in good positions when he goes fowards, and when he goes back he drifts too centrally which leaves a gap. Johnson is a out and out RWB. Yes he goes fowards but he is a lot more dangerous than Brown when he goes fowards and as long as we have enough cover and a good formation to cover him then it works well.

[StefanWolves]

Lol @ All the people criticising a SECOND STRING England side just loosing to a FULL STRENGTH Brazil side.