In life, sometimes you risk the most by not taking risk

[Scipio Africanus]

@Scip, having never used Sancho as a wide midfielder/wingback, such a call at the table for highest stakes, is beyond bonkers.

Oga Coachiliam Brokenbetspeare

Suspend the comforts of the bottle for a moment and check the England lineup against Ukraine.

[felarey]

Interesting analogy. I once heard an Iraq war veteran call that type of scenario 'being in the death zone', the enemy has surrounded you and you don't know where they are and how many they are. The way to respond is to grab the hammer and head in one direction fighting. But the presence of family would complicate that decision. I'd only do that if I believe I'd be killed.

Anyway, England couldn't exploit the weakness in personel Italy had in defence (lost 2 starting fullbacks and retirees in CD), but not for lack of trying. Especially later in the game when Saka came on and the fastest player on the pitch (maybe all Euros) on the left Raheem Sterling. I noticed at the beginning of extra time, the italians were curiously desperate to play and keep the ball in England's half. Another time later, Chiellini was positioning himself farther to the left, like between the fullback and left CD. It's a good game to rewatch from a tactical perspective. I really think Mancini's advantage was having the experience of managing a top team of players over a season compared to Southgate, a national team coach with the luxury of cherry picking players based on form and conditioning.
In the first half, from the start to late in the half, England had the upper hand, at times I thought it was too easy for them. Then came the half time pep talk and the changes and it was all Italy. England were playing not to lose.

[Coach]

@Scip, having never used Sancho as a wide midfielder/wingback, such a call at the table for highest stakes, is beyond bonkers.

Oga Coachiliam Brokenbetspeare

Suspend the comforts of the bottle for a moment and check the England lineup against Ukraine.

@Scip, the above was spoken with full viewing of the Crimean war. England reverted to a back four and operated with a 4-2-3-1 of sorts. In the 3-5-2 proposed, Sancho will be playing deeper and with far greater defensive duty, a role he has not played for England. To trust the greatest unknown, when the stakes were so high, would be ludicrous.

[Scipio Africanus]

@Scip, having never used Sancho as a wide midfielder/wingback, such a call at the table for highest stakes, is beyond bonkers.

Oga Coachiliam Brokenbetspeare

Suspend the comforts of the bottle for a moment and check the England lineup against Ukraine.

@Scip, the above was spoken with full viewing of the Crimean war. England reverted to a back four and operated with a 4-2-3-1 of sorts. In the 3-5-2 proposed, Sancho will be playing deeper and with far greater defensive duty, a role he has not played for England. To trust the greatest unknown, when the stakes were so high, would be ludicrous.

Fixed by having Philips and perhaps Grealish drop deeper when required. A static mindset is a danger to winning silverware, and the bank balance. #RiskyBets

[lionga]

Even with Southgate's starting lineup England could've done much better. Going defensive usually entails an idea to hit the opposition on the break, except England were inept at the latter after their early goal. Many times they would win the ball in their defensive third only to hoof the ball upfield or dilly-dally and lose it almost immediately. Some of this was due to Italy's counterpressing, but even without pressure England's transitions were poor. I saw a stat somewhere that is hard to believe, which is that throughout the tournament England attempted far fewer fast breaks than Italy. Considering England's speedy attackers which would be the envy of Italy or any other team in the competition, that is hugely underwhelming.

[furiously frank]

One of the biggest decisions Westerhoff made that won theAfcon for us is introducing a young fast forward player in Amuneke against the Zambians. But for that tactical deployment, we may have lost

[cchinukw]

England had them on the ropes for the first 30 - 40 minutes bro.

Italy were just better - tactically, mentally and more resilient.

It was like watching a chessmaster on the ropes begin to turn the tide.

Let's admit that Italy had more in the bag as England had rum out of ideas. Eventually they were forced into the part that Italians have mastered for decades and prepared meticulously for ahead of this tournament.

You didn't even read my post. Please read next time before replying.

I did. I just have a better way of not beating about the bush to
make my point.

Your reply and that of a couple of others on this thread are faith-based replies, faith in Italy's historical superiority over England(If the outcome was preordained, why even play the game?) completely bereft of any thinking or analysis.

You didn't address the fact that England kept more than half of their young creative players on the bench.

Didn't address the fact that Chiellini wasn't forced to take a yellow for the team until Saka came on. He took that yellow in the 90th minute!!!!

What if he had taken that yellow in the 10th minute, or the 15th minute, or even on the half hour? You don't think that would have made him more cautious and easier to exploit, and affected Italy's defensive fervor for the remainder of the game? Think man!!! Think!! Lay off the faith based stuff that we Africans are so fond of.

That is why an African team can never beat Brazil 7-1. We would have "faith" that they were better than us and overlook their glaring weaknesses right in front of us which we could exploit ruthlessly with a little analysis. We are "faithful" people.

Bro I nor know where you see prophecy for wetin I post o.

My post is purely based on the performance on the night.

Gareth's England dominated the first part of the match and deserved to take an early lead.

As the game wore on, it became a mind tussle of two coaches with Gareth being out coached by Mancini.

The Italians have always been known to favour a penalty shoot out to decide games. They aren't known for scoring too many goals.

England until recently were known for drawing first blood in the first 30 -40 mins of tournament football and then disappearing for the rest of the match.

On the day, each team reverted to type and the rest as they say is history.

[YUJAM]

They dominated the first 30 mins. Slightly

The rest was Italy. Let's not reinvent what happened. In fact possession was 70 to 30 and every offensive stat was similarly lopsided

England had them on the ropes for the first 30 - 40 minutes bro.

Italy were just better - tactically, mentally and more resilient.

It was like watching a chessmaster on the ropes begin to turn the tide.

Let's admit that Italy had more in the bag as England had rum out of ideas. Eventually they were forced into the part that Italians have mastered for decades and prepared meticulously for ahead of this tournament.

You didn't even read my post. Please read next time before replying.

I did. I just have a better way of not beating about the bush to
make my point.

Your reply and that of a couple of others on this thread are faith-based replies, faith in Italy's historical superiority over England(If the outcome was preordained, why even play the game?) completely bereft of any thinking or analysis.

You didn't address the fact that England kept more than half of their young creative players on the bench.

Didn't address the fact that Chiellini wasn't forced to take a yellow for the team until Saka came on. He took that yellow in the 90th minute!!!!

What if he had taken that yellow in the 10th minute, or the 15th minute, or even on the half hour? You don't think that would have made him more cautious and easier to exploit, and affected Italy's defensive fervor for the remainder of the game? Think man!!! Think!! Lay off the faith based stuff that we Africans are so fond of.

That is why an African team can never beat Brazil 7-1. We would have "faith" that they were better than us and overlook their glaring weaknesses right in front of us which we could exploit ruthlessly with a little analysis. We are "faithful" people.

Bro I nor know where you see prophecy for wetin I post o.

My post is purely based on the performance on the night.

Gareth's England dominated the first part of the match and deserved to take an early lead.

As the game wore on, it became a mind tussle of two coaches with Gareth being out coached by Mancini.

The Italians have always been known to favour a penalty shoot out to decide games. They aren't known for scoring too many goals.

England until recently were known for drawing first blood in the first 30 -40 mins of tournament football and then disappearing for the rest of the match.

On the day, each team reverted to type and the rest as they say is history.