barry'sboots

Safegate can clearly see the backlash to his interviews - where he has avoided answering direct questions re Jack - and I don't think he is stupid enough to not see that Jack has been the pest player on the pitch when given the chance. He knows that Jack is becoming a firm England (and not just Villa) fan's favourite. Are you really expecting him to stand at the side of the pitch and pull the V's at Jack as he comes off the pitch to demonstrate his dislike??? I might not like Safegate and I might think he has an axe to grind with Jack but I don't think he is an idiot! Shaking Jack'shand when he leaves the pitch is certainly not conclusive evidence that the grudge has now gone??

So many double negatives, I'm not sure which side of the argument you are on??

Well that definitely puts it beyond all doubt that he now loves the Villa!!

As I said, because we believe that Jack is England's most effective creative player as evidenced by 4 MOTMs in his 6/7 performances and cannot understand why he doesn't get into the team. You've compared him with Foden but he could equally play at 10, instead of Mount, and would bring a lot more control/attacking threat to the game. You might argue that Mount does more defensively but I would say that Jack has been pretty strong defensively when asked to play at 8 or 10 by us and also that,with two 6's behind him, that is less relevant.

Yes. It didn't matter that Jack was often playing as an "8" when he was putting in these numbers and, because we needed it, was shifted to a more offensive wide role and, not surprisingly, his offensive statistic improves.

Some of us are just trying to understand/rationalise why Safegate would chose not to play his best and most creative player in supposedly the toughest game of the group. We can't see any logical reason other than the fact that he still has some kind of issue/bears a grudge. You, and several others, are welcome to disagree with this perspective but I don't see much logical support for his exclusion coming from this camp. Instead, I am largely seeing a "stop being paranoid" view with little cohesive argument to support it?? Do you also think that Safegate was wise to: play a RB at LB in front of Man U's player of the season and the LB who played for the CL winners? play a "6" at "8" when he had good "8" options in Mount, Bellingham and Jack? play Mount at "10" in front of Jack? bring Rashford on in front of Jack? Do you think that the performance - a stodgy 1-0 win with roughly similar possession and shots stats against an ageing Croatian midfield - justifies these selections?

And so he should be. He was asked a not unreasonable question that he just could not produce a reasonable and logical answer for.

Absolutely agree with this. Doesn't mean that the managers at the time were right and doesn't excuse Safegate from doing it now. He's not going to get arrested for not picking Jack - it is not a crime! I think most accept this (well almost)?? However, a number of us (obviously not all) are massively frustrated watching bland and negative England performances when we believe that Jack's inclusion (coupled with a more progressive approach elsewhere) could see a much brighter England play and dominate games and that we would be in a much better shape to play the better teams later on in the tournament and stand a chance of winning it.

You can say that he has hardly played for his club side in the second half of the season though!

To be fair to Coufal that assist came from the right side when Jack switched. I have no idea why it took Jack and/or Deano that long to work out that was he needed to do. Jack can play anywhere - his assist for England came from the RW as well - and should be much more fluid in switching sides/position as far as I am concerned.

I haven't seen anyone on the verge of paranoid meltdown, just a number who are very frustrated as they feel that this England team could be much better if our manager made better decisions. Of course this is subjective but if you don't want subjective discussions I am really not sure why you would come on to a discussion forum. Croatia were a decent side a few years back. When we lost to them in 2018 we did get overrun in CM but we only had Henderson in there - the other two were Lingard and Alli because we had a dearth of CM'ers. We don't now - we have two strong "6"s in Rice and Phillips (I would say competing for one spot) and two/three strong "8"s to play alongside in Mount, Hendo and Bellingham. That is well balanced with Jack at "10" in front who is also decent in the tackle (certainly better than Alli and Lingard from what I have seen). Equally, the Croatians are ageing and not as strong as they were 3 years ago. We should have won much more comfortably and I, and a large number on here, believe that we would have if Safegate had picked a better balanced side. And that's not mentioning a RB playing LB ahead of Man U's POTS and the LB from the CL winners. Equally, that balanced set up but would serve us much better in later games against better opponents where ball retention becomes even more important. We will need this if we are looking to win the tournament.

No your talking - he would make Safegate look fantastic!

You can win all of your games until you lose one in the knockout stage and then you most definitely won't win the tournament!!

Yes, his remit is to win. But in doing so, in the "easier games" (qualifying and, I think, yesterday's game can fall into this), he needs to develop a formation/identity/style of play that he can take into the tougher games and still have a chance of winning those and, subsequently, the tournaments. I think I could have played yesterday (slight exaggeration I know) and found space, as Phillips did, in amongst that ageing Croatian midfield BUT that does not prepare you to then play against the Italys, Portugal, Spains, Germanys, Frances etc. which is where we habitually fall down in these tournaments.

Whilst we share much the same view on Safegate's abilities as a Manager, I think you can accuse him of many things but I don't think you can call him a "bottle job"?? If anything, he is very brave to stick to his thoughts and selection decisions in the face of significant contradiction from both pundits and the public. If he were a bottler he would go with the popular choices, trying to please the masses i.e. play Jack. I think he is a cautious, negative manager - playing a "better defender" but out of position, playing a "6" (better defender) out of position as an "8" - much like Brucie was for us (he wants to not lose rather than to win) which is a real shame given the array of attacking talent that we have at the minute, most notably our Jack.

How is that team balanced - Walker is a liability at RB; Trippier is decent at RB BUT played LB; Phillips is a "6" BUT played as an "8"?? Do you honestly think, with the talent we have available, that performance was the best that we could hope for? A stodgy 1-0 win against an ageing and toothless Croatia team?

He's been like this for ages - certainly all of the games that Jack has played in. This, for me, is bad coaching. Safegate needs to tell him how he should play and, if he does not play that way, he needs to be dropped. He is a goal scorer but not when he is on the half way line and stepping on the toes of the midfielders!

Ollie with Buendia and Jack on either side - if he doesn't win the golden boot next season then somebody has got a bad injury!

Kieran Trippier is probably the best false "9" in Europe ... oh, and he can take a set piece!!

JWP is not there??

Rio seemed pretty impressed. Also an article on the Grealish thread featuring analysis from TIFO that states Sterling was played because of his ability to run in behind and the long ball from Mings was a key part of this stratgey!

Mount has played at 8 for Chelski and Jack has played there for us. Luiz could play there in a 4-3-3 with McGinn or Sanson playing as the second 8/quasi-10 (the furthest forward of the two 8's). I think, if we are seriously interested in JWP, we will probably play 4-3-3 and there will be four players competing for the 2 x 8 roles (although see speculation that Sanson may not be long for the Villa). I hope that Ramsey gets a loan to a top Championship side so we can, hopefully, see him getting a good volume of games over the next 12 months.

I agree that Jack can play better, but, as you say, he has consistently been England's MOTM. My fear is that, even if Safegate were to recognise the error of his ways and attempt to play a more progressive side with Jack at its heart, we have not been accustomed to it. The best teams, imho, have a style of play and understand it. Safegate is all over the place. He has consistently picked Dier in a 3-4-3 in the qualifiers and ignored Konsa, White and Dunk, all who have been much better. Then we get to a tournament and he drops him and starts to play a 4 whilst keeping Coady, who can only really play in a 3. People are banging on that White should play but why hasn't he been playing/around the squad for 6-12 months ... he's been much better than Dier over that period. Safegate has a style - I believe it is wrong and does not utilise our key assets to the optimal. I don't think he will change it but if he does he probably doesn't know what that should look like because he has played a negative 3-4-3 for most of the last two years. He's like Bruce on steroids - he plays dull, "safe" football as he is afraid of losing rather than playing progressive front foot football because he is afraid of not winning. I personally want to see the latter and believe that we have the squad/talent to do this and compete with the best. I am not sure that you can switch overnight at this level when you come up against well drilled sides like France or Italy that have an established identity.

8 minutes of my life I'll never get back - he could have said all of that in 60 seconds if he'd cut out the repetition. I certainly get the pace to stretch a defence. I don't think you need a Rice and Philips though! Philips played as an "8" which he has never done at club level let alone at International level. Mount could have played there (or even Jack!) with Jack at 10 and we would have had much more control imho.

I don't think I've seen anyone say that they are crap players?? Clearly that would be churlish - they have both just played in the Champions League Final and both were seen as key players/influencers on their team. Mount is clearly quality - he's just won the champions league and has dragged (almost) that team through at times this season, certainly been their best player at times alongside a recent resurgence in Kante. He is quality but, for me, is a dynamic "8" that can play "10" but cannot do what Jack does on the ball. Foden is also quality BUT has been bought up in the Citeh set up playing with some of the best attacking talent in the world. He is used to one touch football, pass and move, playing "Guardiola" ball. He has not had the footballing education that Jack has had, playing in, until recently, a struggling Villa team and having to drag it over the line and definitely be its prime creative force. I think Jack's experience is more relevant to the England set up - where the quality/interplay is probably not up to the Citeh level and it needs somebody to grab the game by the scruff of the neck and take control.