| |
|
“Erikkson must stay!’ trumpets the Guardian. Really? To my eyes it, looked like the worst tactical decision ever to just try and defend a one goal lead against opponents who were shite at everything *except* attacking. Replacing Scholes and Gerrard with Hargreaves and fucking, fucking Phil Neville = worst decisions ever. Bar none [/absurd hyperbole, sue me]. Beckham’s gonna get all the flak, but he never stopped working. It’s Ugly Phil that stood off and just let Rui Costa score. The grotesque dunce.
Pah, Erikkson. These subs were even earlier and even worse than his subs in the France match. Gave Portugal a chance when they shouldn’t have had any bloody chance at all. This defend, defend approach is absolute lunacy unless you’ve no other option; we’re not Italy. You can say there’s an over-reliance on Rooney, but the biggest impact he’s had has been in allowing all the other England players to really go at their opponents, like they’ve always been capable of. Result: a free scoring team and joy throughout the land. Finally, the tactic of hoofing it up the pitch and bouncing it off Heskey - ie, the entire justification for H’s presence in the team, has been discarded, so how about now giving some of the other boys a go? I mean, no Rooney? Well, Dyer can run with the ball, too. How come Neville has come on what seems like umpteen times this tournament, but Kieran Dyer hasn’t had a single kick? Or Joe Cole, for that matter: if you’re minded to replace Paul Scholes, why not replace him with someone else who can pick out that glittery wonder-pass? I mean, having had the Portugese on the back foot, why not try and keep them there?
Plus. Bent referee, dodgy penalty spot, blah blah. Yeah. We all saw it. But they could have just won the bloody thing without ever worrying about all of that.
Arrggh. |
|
|
