Shearer's verdict

[Bombadil 0]

It was looking dodgy at one stage for England against Trinidad and Tobago.

 

But I was always confident we would score even though it looked as though it might be one of those days, with the chances that were going begging.

 

England can pass it better. There was a lot of long balls that didn't go anywhere, a lot of play where we didn't have any width or penetration.

 

We got there in the end, patience prevailed and we got a bit of width when Aaron Lennon came on.

 

He was the one who added a bit of pace and injected some life into the forward line, because he was the only one who went past anyone all day.

 

But they won again and that's six points, three goals scored and no goals conceded.

 

Manager Sven-Goran Eriksson may take some criticism, but the fact of the matter is they've won both games.

 

England have to improve a lot, and I think they will improve.

 

I haven't seen anything from any of the other teams that suggests England can't win the World Cup.

 

No team has jumped out at me as being absolutely brilliant, but you very rarely get that in the early stages of competitions anyway.

 

I was surprised that he took Michael Owen off again because when you are looking for a goal and looking to win, I would have left him on.

 

To be fair to Sven, he made the decision and the decision's paid off.

 

He left Peter Crouch on, and although Peter missed a couple of good chances, he got the header from a tremendous ball in from David Beckham and that set us on our way.

 

So, keeping Crouch on was a decision that was justified, but I would start Owen and Rooney against Sweden.

 

Michael just needs a goal for confidence. They're hard enough to get but as a centre-forward, you need to get off the mark as quick as possible - the longer it goes on, the more difficult it becomes.

 

He's been in this position before, so no-one will tell him anything he doesn't already know.

 

It won't faze him, I wouldn't worry about him at all. Obviously he will wish he had scored - he had a good chance with a header.

 

Rooney eased himself into the game, but it was Lennon who made the biggest impact in coming on.

 

Rooney will get better, that's a not problem. The good thing is he's been on, got through the game, and he's fine.

 

I don't know what the situation is with Theo Walcott. He hasn't used him, and it doesn't look like he will be using him, but they might not need him now that Rooney's fit.

[Guest Sima]

Just protecting his mate tbh.

 

This man to start

 

[Park Life 71]

Just protecting his mate tbh.

 

This man to start

 

149470[/snapback]

 

I would start Rooney and Owen. I still beleive Crouch being in the side tempts us away from porper football.

[Kid Dynamite 7182]

his girlfriend must be embarassed that she managed to bag the ugliest player in the team like. she blatantly wouldnt have pissed on him if he was on fire 2 years ago!

[rikko 20]

Crouch is good enough for england but i think he should be used as a sub to try and turn things around. Imagine him flicking balls down for both owen and rooney to run onto. It might be long ball, but its effective.

[luckyluke 2]

his girlfriend must be embarassed that she managed to bag the ugliest player in the team like. she blatantly wouldnt have pissed on him if he was on fire 2 years ago!

149554[/snapback]

 

It's not easy to piss on a 6ft 7inch tall man. Especially if you're a woman.

[Gemmill 46097]

If you drop Owen for Rooney, England will instantly look better than they have been. That much is a fact. But we won't be better for the absence of Owen, it'll be because Rooney dropping into midfield and providing an outlet will stop these ridiculous long balls being played. Once you've dropped Owen though, when you create the chances you've got Crouch on the end of them. Which is where it all falls apart - he misses more than he scores, and you can't afford that, especially against the top sides in the knockouts.

 

England will play better with Rooney in the side than Owen, but they won't progress with Crouch in the side ahead of Owen because the bloke isn't prolific enough. I would go with Owen and Rooney every time - once we start playing the way we play with Rooney in the side, Owen instantly becomes the obvious choice ahead of Crouch.

[khay 10]

his girlfriend must be embarassed that she managed to bag the ugliest player in the team like. she blatantly wouldnt have pissed on him if he was on fire 2 years ago!

149554[/snapback]

 

It's not easy to piss on a 6ft 7inch tall man. Especially if you're a woman.

149563[/snapback]

 

 

Unless they are lying down.

[Kid Dynamite 7182]

just beat me to it you bastard!

[luckyluke 2]

his girlfriend must be embarassed that she managed to bag the ugliest player in the team like. she blatantly wouldnt have pissed on him if he was on fire 2 years ago!

149554[/snapback]

 

It's not easy to piss on a 6ft 7inch tall man. Especially if you're a woman.

149563[/snapback]

 

 

Unless they are lying down.

149572[/snapback]

 

True, but I doubt he'd take being on fire lying down.

[geordieshandy 0]

If you drop Owen for Rooney, England will instantly look better than they have been.  That much is a fact.  But we won't be better for the absence of Owen, it'll be because Rooney dropping into midfield and providing an outlet will stop these ridiculous long balls being played.  Once you've dropped Owen though, when you create the chances you've got Crouch on the end of them.  Which is where it all falls apart - he misses more than he scores, and you can't afford that, especially against the top sides in the knockouts.

 

England will play better with Rooney in the side than Owen, but they won't progress with Crouch in the side ahead of Owen because the bloke isn't prolific enough.  I would go with Owen and Rooney every time - once we start playing the way we play with Rooney in the side, Owen instantly becomes the obvious choice ahead of Crouch.

149567[/snapback]

 

Spot on. One of the problems we have with Owen and Crouch playing together is that we don't have the link up with the midfield that Rooney provides and limits us to hoying hopeful balls at the lighthouse who generally speaking can't aim his knock down headers, or many of his headers, for shit.

[Park Life 71]

If you drop Owen for Rooney, England will instantly look better than they have been.  That much is a fact.  But we won't be better for the absence of Owen, it'll be because Rooney dropping into midfield and providing an outlet will stop these ridiculous long balls being played.  Once you've dropped Owen though, when you create the chances you've got Crouch on the end of them.  Which is where it all falls apart - he misses more than he scores, and you can't afford that, especially against the top sides in the knockouts.

 

England will play better with Rooney in the side than Owen, but they won't progress with Crouch in the side ahead of Owen because the bloke isn't prolific enough.  I would go with Owen and Rooney every time - once we start playing the way we play with Rooney in the side, Owen instantly becomes the obvious choice ahead of Crouch.

149567[/snapback]

 

Spot on. One of the problems we have with Owen and Crouch playing together is that we don't have the link up with the midfield that Rooney provides and limits us to hoying hopeful balls at the lighthouse who generally speaking can't aim his knock down headers, or many of his headers, for shit.

149592[/snapback]

 

General Gemmill and Shandy have it covered.

[geordieshandy 0]

If you drop Owen for Rooney, England will instantly look better than they have been.  That much is a fact.  But we won't be better for the absence of Owen, it'll be because Rooney dropping into midfield and providing an outlet will stop these ridiculous long balls being played.  Once you've dropped Owen though, when you create the chances you've got Crouch on the end of them.  Which is where it all falls apart - he misses more than he scores, and you can't afford that, especially against the top sides in the knockouts.

 

England will play better with Rooney in the side than Owen, but they won't progress with Crouch in the side ahead of Owen because the bloke isn't prolific enough.  I would go with Owen and Rooney every time - once we start playing the way we play with Rooney in the side, Owen instantly becomes the obvious choice ahead of Crouch.

149567[/snapback]

 

Spot on. One of the problems we have with Owen and Crouch playing together is that we don't have the link up with the midfield that Rooney provides and limits us to hoying hopeful balls at the lighthouse who generally speaking can't aim his knock down headers, or many of his headers, for shit.

149592[/snapback]

 

General Gemmill and Shandy have it covered.

149593[/snapback]

 

 

As always. And there's enough of us to cover most things.

[khay 10]

his girlfriend must be embarassed that she managed to bag the ugliest player in the team like. she blatantly wouldnt have pissed on him if he was on fire 2 years ago!

149554[/snapback]

 

It's not easy to piss on a 6ft 7inch tall man. Especially if you're a woman.

149563[/snapback]

 

 

Unless they are lying down.

149572[/snapback]

 

True, but I doubt he'd take being on fire lying down.

149589[/snapback]

 

I believe that the best way to put yourself out when on fire is to roll around on the ground.

[Kid Dynamite 7182]

or jump in a river!

[khay 10]

or jump in a river!

149616[/snapback]

 

Not helpful if you cant swim.

[Bombadil 0]

If you drop Owen for Rooney, England will instantly look better than they have been.  That much is a fact.  But we won't be better for the absence of Owen, it'll be because Rooney dropping into midfield and providing an outlet will stop these ridiculous long balls being played.  Once you've dropped Owen though, when you create the chances you've got Crouch on the end of them.  Which is where it all falls apart - he misses more than he scores, and you can't afford that, especially against the top sides in the knockouts.

 

England will play better with Rooney in the side than Owen, but they won't progress with Crouch in the side ahead of Owen because the bloke isn't prolific enough.  I would go with Owen and Rooney every time - once we start playing the way we play with Rooney in the side, Owen instantly becomes the obvious choice ahead of Crouch.

149567[/snapback]

 

Exactly. I hope Eriksson feels the same about his first-choice striking partnership. It will be a travesty if he starts with Rooney and Crouch and leaves Owen on the bench. Crouch may have scored yesterday, but I still think he's some way from being good enough at this level.

[Gemmill 46097]

If you drop Owen for Rooney, England will instantly look better than they have been.  That much is a fact.  But we won't be better for the absence of Owen, it'll be because Rooney dropping into midfield and providing an outlet will stop these ridiculous long balls being played.  Once you've dropped Owen though, when you create the chances you've got Crouch on the end of them.  Which is where it all falls apart - he misses more than he scores, and you can't afford that, especially against the top sides in the knockouts.

 

England will play better with Rooney in the side than Owen, but they won't progress with Crouch in the side ahead of Owen because the bloke isn't prolific enough.  I would go with Owen and Rooney every time - once we start playing the way we play with Rooney in the side, Owen instantly becomes the obvious choice ahead of Crouch.

149567[/snapback]

 

Exactly. I hope Eriksson feels the same about his first-choice striking partnership. It will be a travesty if he starts with Rooney and Crouch and leaves Owen on the bench. Crouch may have scored yesterday, but I still think he's some way from being good enough at this level.

149766[/snapback]

 

I can see him starting with Rooney and Crouch and then taking Rooney off after an hour and sending Owen on for some more long-ball-tainment.

[TheInspiration 1]

Owen is a proven goalscorer, and I'd have far more confidence with him in front of goal than Crouch. How's he going to regain that sharpness if he doesn't play? If we want to get far, he's going to be important, which is why he should definitely start, while Crouch can have a good impact off the bench. I thought he was pretty poor yesterday, the goal aside.

[Park Life 71]

If you drop Owen for Rooney, England will instantly look better than they have been.  That much is a fact.  But we won't be better for the absence of Owen, it'll be because Rooney dropping into midfield and providing an outlet will stop these ridiculous long balls being played.  Once you've dropped Owen though, when you create the chances you've got Crouch on the end of them.  Which is where it all falls apart - he misses more than he scores, and you can't afford that, especially against the top sides in the knockouts.

 

England will play better with Rooney in the side than Owen, but they won't progress with Crouch in the side ahead of Owen because the bloke isn't prolific enough.  I would go with Owen and Rooney every time - once we start playing the way we play with Rooney in the side, Owen instantly becomes the obvious choice ahead of Crouch.

149567[/snapback]

 

Exactly. I hope Eriksson feels the same about his first-choice striking partnership. It will be a travesty if he starts with Rooney and Crouch and leaves Owen on the bench. Crouch may have scored yesterday, but I still think he's some way from being good enough at this level.

149766[/snapback]

 

I can see him starting with Rooney and Crouch and then taking Rooney off after an hour and sending Owen on for some more long-ball-tainment.

149767[/snapback]

 

I don't know why the Swede insists on torturing little Mikey.

[Papa Lazaru 0]

Agree with what Gemmil has said. Only an idiot would start Crouch ahead of Owen in a world cup, it would be ludicrous.

 

Theres no use Sven blaming Owen and continually taking him of when the service consists of aimless punts up field instead of incisive football.

 

As soon as Rooney is there he will improve out style, shape and gameplan and people will see a marked improvement in Owen.

 

If England want to win the world cup, when it comes to the tight games in later rounds it's Owen's goals we will need, he is our proven world class goal scoere at every level throughout his career.

[Bombadil 0]

From the Guardian:

 

Sven-Goran Eriksson has confirmed Wayne Rooney will start England's match against Sweden tomorrow but the coach is considering a more radical alteration that would see an angry Steven Gerrard sit out the final group game.

 

Rooney was asked to partner Michael Owen in attack yesterday during England's final training session in the Black Forest before heading to Cologne, while Owen Hargreaves took the place of Gerrard in midfield. Eriksson also considered playing Tottenham's Jermaine Jenas in place of Frank Lampard, but in the end stuck to his assertion of Saturday that he would change no more than two of his starting line-up for a game England do not need to win.

 

[manc-mag 1]

From the Guardian:

 

Sven-Goran Eriksson has confirmed Wayne Rooney will start England's match against Sweden tomorrow but the coach is considering a more radical alteration that would see an angry Steven Gerrard sit out the final group game.

 

Rooney was asked to partner Michael Owen in attack yesterday during England's final training session in the Black Forest before heading to Cologne, while Owen Hargreaves took the place of Gerrard in midfield. Eriksson also considered playing Tottenham's Jermaine Jenas in place of Frank Lampard, but in the end stuck to his assertion of Saturday that he would change no more than two of his starting line-up for a game England do not need to win.

 

150524[/snapback]

 

It would be an horrific irony if the efficacy of the Gerrard/Lampard sacred cow of a partnership was finally tested by leaving either of them out for that lanky cowardly streak off piss.