Recircle

He wasn't involved enough - wasn't allowed to be - to feel the pain of most of the others were going through, and obviously didn't have to deal with the meltdown that comes with missing a shoot-out penalty . He probably felt unhappy, frustrated and a bit numb. I think even if England had sneaked it in the shoot-out, his celebrations wouldn't have been as wild as the players who played a longer match. He'd have joined in, but not with mad abandon (post-England win he might have offered himself up to be one of the first players to be interviewed after the game, since I don't think he would've been incoherent with joy).

I'm assuming the takers of the first five had been selected before the game began (hence the subs at the end). If Gareth Methodgate's got his pre-agreed, typed up in triplicate list, you can't just disregard it and barge in front (Jack couldn't anyway; he's not established enough yet in the England set-up to do that, and apparently has to walk on eggshells around Southgate). Keane comes out with some good stuff as a pundit, but when big games become tense he too often reverts to hackneyed real-men-step-up-and-take-control Old West gunfight-type stuff (him abandoning the Republic of Ireland squad in the 2002 World Cup over a spat with Mick McCarthy tends to work to undermine his authority here - especially since ROI had to face a penalty shoot-out in that tournament - against Spain in the round of 16 - and so Roy was AWOL when the key opportunity came there for him to lead by example and take one of the early penalties—or any of them!)

Lovely stuff, but if it's settled by a single goal, I think I'd prefer Grealish to have a brilliant assist rather than scoring the goal himself. Whoever gets that winner, if it comes, their life will probably go off-the-scale, public spotlight-wise, and with Grealish already having a reputation for being a maverick and possessing plenty of self-confidence (notwithstanding that fact that he seems good at separating his footballing obligations from all the off-the-pitch stuff), he'll have a hard time staying grounded (edit: or being allowed the opportunity to try and stay grounded).

Doesn't seem to have much interest in Grealish even in training. First looks to his right, then to his left, misses the nutmeg happening in front of him completely and ends up reacting to other people's reactions!

At the end of the game last night, during all the handshakes, Southgate put his arm around Grealish and seemed to spend longer talking to him than some of the other England players with subs vests on. Was he telling him to start getting himself mentally prepped to play a key role in the next game (or hopefully two)?

I think Shaw would've made the same pass, had their positions been reversed (he made just that sort of pass in the build up to the second goal when their positions effectively were reversed). Grealish, Shaw and Kane have started to form a nice alliance. All three also combined in the goal against the Czechs; Shaw was effectively a decoy in that, but Jack conspicuously checked behind himself twice in the build up to that goal to see where Shaw was, drawing out one of the Czech defenders with the second glance.

I didn't mean he wouldn't orchestrate when he gets the chance, but he probably won't become the sort of conduit that he is for Villa. He's just among better players with England, and international tournament knock-out football is cagey, high-stakes stuff; he's bound to drift in and out more.

Pressure was off a bit for the Czech game; England had already qualified for the next stage by then, and the team could play more expansively. From what I've seen, Shaw and Kane notably tend to look for Grealish and bring him into play, but he's not going to be the orchestrator for England like he is for Villa.

The impact role is starting to make sense, isn't it: Grealish gets a stage entrance and a cheer all to himself, and England draws on it as an energy and confidence boost. Bit of an airy strategy nevertheless, playing a largely conservative, containing game for sixty-odd minutes and then unleashing Grealish to lift the atmosphere and add an X-factor to the pattern of play. I'm wondering if there isn't a bit of fitness management being snuck in under cover of that. Maybe there's a concern about how well and for how long his shins can 100% hold up.

Possibly at about the same time that the perfectly fine (and more euphonious word) 'poisonous' started getting dropped in favour of the dull buzzword 'toxic'. Why? hard to say. Maybe using punchy words containing letters like 'v' and 'x' makes the user feel as though he or she is living in a world of swish, sharp-angled megalopolises?

Once might be a typo; used twice and it starts to look pointed (it does, after all, incorporate the word 'berk').

I don't think TRO means Smith is done as a manager when he says "it's done for him", he means the analysis of what's going wrong is being done for him by the pundits on MOTD.

Wins aren't 'found', unfortunately; they have to be created.

Fair enough. I think Zatman's reply quoted just above yours about being "gone by Christmas" if he doesn't start turning it around made me conflate.

That's just under three weeks away. You can start to worry, and rightly, but surely you're not implying that he might be in danger of being ditched after about two months in charge?

It's nice to see this place buzzing with a bit of optimism, but honestly, it's such early, early days. A couple of wins against the Baggies is great; an F.A. Cup semi-final is smashing, but how about reining it in a bit until Villa have pulled clearer of trouble in the Prem?!

Being spared Lineker if Villa go down. There is that silver lining, I suppose.

And certainly, Pulis, whose name is getting bandied about more and more as the guy Villa should've appointed, is a big-up the egos, psychological motivator-type. Sherwood would seem to lean towards the Pulis approach.

Brilliant, that'll keep us in the league. The way a manager talks to the press after a match offers about the only time you get to gauge how he might approach talking to the players into performing better. Part of his job is to fill his players with confidence and belief (somehow!). Sherwood seems like a guy who might be able to psychologically chivvy players more than Lambert, to judge the latter on his perpetual dozy look and phoned-in, emotionless words, post-match.

http://www.bbc.com/sport/live/football/31523058 That's cool-headed, cogent analysis, at least. More insightful than almost any Lambert post-match utterance.

Why would he want to bring down a shit boatload of negative press coverage upon himself by doing something like that? How do you think he would be portrayed? You make him sound like a reality TV star who wants press coverage at any cost! I very much doubt Sherwood is going to walk, unless there's a sudden utter breakdown in communications and understanding between him and those he's directly answerable to.

That would be panicking, plain and simple.

This one thousand times A Midlands guy Pulis is from Wales by way of Bristol! Or are you counting Wales as a 'greater Midlands'?

Look, Tim Sherwood should really have made sure he was in charge of Villa for more days than he has been. It's the 25th of Feb, and he's still only been boss for eleven days. It should be double that, by now. What's going on??

If things eventually worked themselves out 'logically' then I'd probably agree, but this view operates on the basis that 'quality' will always assert itself sooner or later, and that doesn't necessarily always happen. If Villa are to avoid relegation, they're going to have to up their effort and commitment; you fight your way free of trouble (has a team ever finessed their way free?).