Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves 08:51 - Jun 20 with 4938 viewsVic

who was far and away the star forward. He chose instead to chose players who fitted his system best - and won the WC!

Sven had Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes who he tried to play together, and I’d say that failed.

It feels like Southgate has a similar thing with Foden and Bellingham. Foden has flattered to deceive out on the left for England despite doing more than OK for City in that position.

So what do we think? Does he stick with both or is it time for Anthony Gordon (or someone else) to be brought in on the left?

Poll: Right now, who would you rather have as Prime Minister?

0
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 08:53 - Jun 20 with 4910 viewsunbelievablue

Foden mainly plays on the right for City, but point taken.

I think its the system and style of play and, to be honest, quality around him that makes it easier for Foden in a City shirt. Personally I wouldn't start him for England.

Le meilleur des mondes possibles
Poll: When booking a reservation at a restaurant/bar, do you give...

0
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 08:55 - Jun 20 with 4886 viewsReuser_is_God

In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 08:53 - Jun 20 by unbelievablue

Foden mainly plays on the right for City, but point taken.

I think its the system and style of play and, to be honest, quality around him that makes it easier for Foden in a City shirt. Personally I wouldn't start him for England.


The key is getting Shaw in at left back to give us neutral width down that side giving Foden more space when he drifts inside.

Evans out
Poll: Are Burgers the new Cheese?

1
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 08:56 - Jun 20 with 4866 viewsbluelagos

One small point:

He did pick Jimmy Greaves. Greaves got injured and missed the QF I think - and Sir Alf stuck with Hunt and Hurst because they had played well and were on form.

Greaves was his first choice for years prior and in the tournament until he was injured. Sir Alf opted not to change a winning team.

Poll: This new lockdown poll - what you reckon?

1
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 10:54 - Jun 20 with 4615 viewsRadlett_blue

In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 08:56 - Jun 20 by bluelagos

One small point:

He did pick Jimmy Greaves. Greaves got injured and missed the QF I think - and Sir Alf stuck with Hunt and Hurst because they had played well and were on form.

Greaves was his first choice for years prior and in the tournament until he was injured. Sir Alf opted not to change a winning team.


Yes, Greaves was probably still injured for the semi final but I'm sure he could have played in the final. Ramsey never really trusted Greaves, partly because he felt he was a bad influence on the likes of Bobby Moore. He was easily the best English goalscorer around & I'm sure Ramsey was actually happier with Hurst in the team & it clearly worked out well.
Foden looks like a bit of a lost soul on the left, but as others have commented, part of the problem is playing the right footed Trippier at LB.

Poll: Should horse racing be banned in the UK?

0
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 11:00 - Jun 20 with 4584 viewsBluefields

Foden was rarely wide left, Trippier was mainly our most advanced left sided player. main issue for me was that Foden was often occupying the same space as Kane or Bellingham
0
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 11:07 - Jun 20 with 4551 viewsElephantintheRoom

Just not true. Ramsey played Greaves and 3 different wingers in the uninspiring group games. Greaves didn’t score and the wingers didn’t create anything. Greaves was injured for the knock tie against Argentina - Hurst came in and scored and did more in one game than Greaves did in group games and the team played better against allegedly the most fearsome team in the competition.

So Ramsey stuck with the more productive option in the semi when Hurst was all but anonymous. Unluckily for Greaves no subs were available. I suspect lifestyle choices also had something to do with it - but Greaves was dropped because he didn’t produce anything.

Blog: The Swinging Sixty

0
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 11:18 - Jun 20 with 4517 viewsMookamoo

Different game now with 5 subs. Even if he does start Foden and Saka, Palmer, Gordon or Bowen will still have the minutes to make a difference.

I do hope Southgate learnt something from that meeting with McKenna
2
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 11:26 - Jun 20 with 4476 views_clive_baker_

Foden was pony in the Serbia game but in true British media fashion far too much has been made of it. He's entitled to an off day, anyone would think he's become a Championship player overnight. He's come off the back of a title winning season for City where he pretty much played every week, scored 19 goals and got 8 assists.

He's massively talented, only 24, and we're very lucky to have him. I wish people would get behind the bloke rather than dig him out as its players like him that could be the difference between winning this thing or not. I would rather see him playing off the right hand side ideally, but when we also have Saka I can see the logic.

The front 4 of Foden, Bellingham, Saka & Kane is our strongest IMO and I'm all for sticking with it and using Gordon, Palmer, Bowen etc off the bench.
2
Login to get fewer ads

In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 11:36 - Jun 20 with 4423 viewsEuropablue

In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 11:26 - Jun 20 by _clive_baker_

Foden was pony in the Serbia game but in true British media fashion far too much has been made of it. He's entitled to an off day, anyone would think he's become a Championship player overnight. He's come off the back of a title winning season for City where he pretty much played every week, scored 19 goals and got 8 assists.

He's massively talented, only 24, and we're very lucky to have him. I wish people would get behind the bloke rather than dig him out as its players like him that could be the difference between winning this thing or not. I would rather see him playing off the right hand side ideally, but when we also have Saka I can see the logic.

The front 4 of Foden, Bellingham, Saka & Kane is our strongest IMO and I'm all for sticking with it and using Gordon, Palmer, Bowen etc off the bench.


I agree with the sentiment.
As some have alluded to, it's a different game now with 5 subs. We really shouldn't obsess so much about starters when we could be like Ipswich and have starters and finishers. Some of the finishers could be some of your best players. It should be all about balance. Why not start Foden off the bench and bring him on after 60 minutes?
Of course in a knock-out situation it would be a gamble to make a game plan only for 90 minutes.
The sample size is too small for us to pass too much judgment and Denmark will play very differently from Serbia. It might even suit us better. Without all the fouling we might have a chance to play a bit more.
Southgate is very good at setting us up, but doesn't seem so good at adapting during the game. He's almost the opposite of KM. Not that KM is setting us up wrong all the time, just that he is very good at changing things after a poor first half and even during games.
0
In 1966 Alf Ramsey famously decided not to play Jimmy Greaves on 11:45 - Jun 20 with 4369 viewsLankHenners

Michael Cox had a good article in The Athletic about it this week - pointed out that a lot of successful teams in International football in recent tournaments have compromised on the left hand side to fit a quality player in. Iniesta for Spain in 2010, Ozil for Germany 2014, Matuidi for France 2018, Mac Allister played on the left for the majority of Argentina's knockout games in 2022.

As has already been said think the more pertinent problem is no Shaw (or any genuine left back) to provide proper width so we struggle to get much through that side of the pitch. Not really a surprise that the side we looked most dangerous on the other night was the one with Saka and Walker on it.

Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand.
Poll: What is Celina's problem?

0




About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2025