|Scoring early 08:59 - Jul 12 with 303 views||hype313|
Does seem to be detrimental doesn't it, all you hear from fans, pundits and management is to keep it tight for the first 20, it's like no one factors in an early goal, it just seemed to change the mentality and dynamic of the team.
You can't sit back for 88 minutes and let the other team try wave after wave, seen it before on many occasions where an early goal seems to upset and disrupt the gameplan.
|Scoring early on 10:45 - Jul 12 with 217 views||Darth_Koont|
Agreed. I’m sure they plan for it but you can understand why you leave it to the opposition to take the risks after that. And if England had snatched a goal at the other end to make it 2-0 then it looks like a consummate performance.
The fly in the ointment was Italy hanging in there and not panicking. Although their goal probably came at exactly the right point when they probably still felt there was time. Would have been interesting to see the approach if it was 1-0 with just 15 minutes left.
|Scoring early on 10:48 - Jul 12 with 212 views||BseaBlue|
Very true! The only thing I would add is that other than the set piece (where there was arguably a foul) we did a bloody good job of shutting them out!
I think if it would have been nil nil with 20 minutes to go, it would have suited us more with our options from the bench.
|Scoring early on 10:55 - Jul 12 with 173 views||Deano69|
I think its more exhausting mentally and physically when that happens. Not sure whether the instructions were to sit and hold the lead for the second half or it was just the right subs from Italy, but we looked a totally different team second half.
That said, if Italy had scored first can you imagine how that game would have played out
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.