TN5 give their view as to who should be in the starting line-up for England’s game against Sweden
After a reasonable point against France, England now face
Sweden in what many are seeing as a must win to avoid a “do or die” match against
host nation Ukraine in the final game. With calls for the team to be more
adventurous, question marks against the fitness of some key players, and the
continued absence of Wayne Rooney, this is TN5’s view of how we should line up
for the game:
More adventurous?
Many commentators have stated they are looking for England
to be far more adventurous and attacking in this second game, after the point
against France. Even Steven Gerrard suggested England should be looking to
dominate possession and the play far more than they did in the opening game. We
think this has potential to be very dangerous.
The danger is that “being more adventurous” can easily be translated
as throwing in an extra forward, or seeing Gerrard bombing on from midfield to
support the front line. This will leave England dangerously exposed and whilst Sweden
may not capitalise this strategy, other teams further in to the competition
will. Our view is that yes we need to push further up the field and dictate the
play more, but this should be done by releasing our full backs to join in the
attack – something they both excel at. Italy have shown the advantages of full
backs getting forward, and whilst we are not suggesting 3 at the back, this can
be done if you have 2 holding midfielders sat in front of the two centre
halves.
The formation
As with the opening game, we believe England’s best
formation is 4-2-3-1 with two holding midfielders. This is how the top sides
are lining up - Busquets and Alonso,
Schweinsteiger and Khedira, Van Bommel and De Jong. The added advantage for England
is we have two great attacking full backs who are better at attacking than
defending, certainly in the case of Johnson.
This needs to be utilised to make us more attacking. Cole and Johnson pushing
on in the spaces out wide, with Gerrard
and Parker holding their positions
to provide the protection.
In effect when we are on top, it will be a 2-4-3-1 line up
as we look to attack down the flanks.
Back 5
The keeper and defence will be kept the same, although we
maintain Jagielka is a better
alternative to Terry.
The key change is getting Cole and Johnson on the
front foot, safe in the knowledge they are covered by the midfield pairing.
Defensive Midfield
Highly likely to be Parker
and Gerrard again. However, if
either were struggling with tiredness, I’d have no hesitation in bringing in Jones to that position, or even Milner. Jones is an excellent short
passer and Milner works his socks off, willing to sacrifice himself for the
greater good of the team.
The key to this role is discipline. Far too often Parker is caught out ahead of the ball
when a move breaks down. He doesn’t need to influence the play going forward
the way he tries to. He is far more effective when he is in position protecting
the back line. Alongside the “tackler” we need a passer. And Gerrard is certainly that. If the pair
of them are disciplined and learn to sit in their position, they provide great
protection, but can also move the ball around well to retain possession.
If Gerrard needs
a lesson in how to play the role, have a look at Schweinsteiger’s performance
against the Dutch. Always in position when the move breaks down, but backing-up
play when the opportunity arises and creating chances. We need Gerrard to fulfil this role.
Attacking Midfield
Young to be
retained in his role behind the front man, but Roy should bring in Walcott down the right. His pace and
ability to set up a chance is ideal for the formation and he will put 2 or 3 good
chances the way of the striker.
On the left it’s a choice between Oxlade-Chamberlain, who had a reasonable game against France (and
the one we’d stick with), or Milner.
His industry down the flank would combine well with an overlapping Cole.
Forward
Our favourite comments from pundits this tournament was the
BBC panel “Welbeck was Man of the
Match for me”, followed by “Other than Lescott’s header, we didn’t create any
chances”. Surely a contradiction if ever there was one? Is it not the job of
the forward to a) score goals; and b) create chances? If Welbeck did neither, was he really Man of the Match?
Whilst Welbeck
had a reasonable game, we still believe Carroll
offers a much greater threat, especially in the formation we believe England
should play. His power and presence would have been a real handful for France,
and will be for Sweden. With the right supply line from attacking full backs
and pacey wingers, he has the height, technique and power in his shot to be a
top marksman this tournament.
No comments:
Post a Comment