Jump to content

The RJW63 Official Jack Grealish Appreciation Thread


kevangrealish

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Mazrim said:

Southgate isn't 'right' about playing Mount instead of Grealish because we won the game.

I agree with the general point you're making. Not sure on Grealish starting myself as he's definitely not right.

But yes, weird goings on atm where people are saying everything was correct because we've grubbed a 1-0 win here and there. What if we play badly again v Denmark and lose? We'll have been crap for 80% of Euro 2020 and Jack Grealish will have once again provided the main highlight in turning the game against Germany.

Haven't we seen this with Steve Bruce here ffs. You need some level of performance to be sustainable and win when we actually play someone decent. Last night was a good start. Keep it up. More Sancho please.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not Mount he should be replacing, and it's not going to happen when he's not played central for England. He should and would be coming on for Sterling, who has generally been shocking but somehow made himself undroppable by popping up at the right place several times throughout the tournament.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mazrim said:

What on earth are you on about? Are you saying Jack only plays because he's perceived as one of the best 11 rather than actually being effective? Because, I don't know if you know this, but Jack is clearly more effective than Mount and has directly influenced winning at least 2 games thus far. How is he not part of a 'cohesive team'?

 

**** me.

Just because Jack is a better player than  Mount, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t right to start him. It genuinely amazes me that despite England winning 4-0 with ease, some people in here still aren’t getting this point. Southgate picks the team based on the opposition and he’s got it dead right all the way through so far.

Fans are mostly idiots and shouldn’t be listened too, they were calling for Kane to be dropped after the first two games.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm of the opinion, based on what we've seen, that Jack's fitness is still being managed. Under that assumption I don't actually have a problem with how he's used Jack. He's kept him fresh for when he's been needed for the most part in a tournament where fixtures come thick and fast. 

However I take issue with the idea that Southgate has "got it right" and that winning automatically means the manager is making all the right decisions. You can always be better. We'd absolutely be a better team if Jack played more minutes. I don't think for a second that putting 4 past Ukraine justifies the decision to play so defensively against Scotland, for example. 

I also think there is a perception for some on this board that wanting Grealish to start is a biased position. It is for us, obviously, but it's a position shared by non-Villa fans all over the world as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The England fan to Villa fan thing is a spectrum. Some people completely forget their club ties when following their national side, some people couldn't care less about the national side unless their club's players are involved. And everything in between. Nobody is right or wrong. 

In this case, wanting Jack to play isn't something that is just happening among Villa fans.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Jack through the middle doesn't suit his system. Simple as that really. And he has earned the right to make that decision, being England manager and all. 

OK. But Mount in the middle does what exactly? Why Mount instead of Grealish? What does Mount do that Grealish couldn't do better? Yes, even at CAM?

The clearing in the woods spent most of the night wandering into Kanes position, drifting out to the wings where he did nothing, and generally being shit as usual.

Highlight of the night: Sancho beat 3 or 4 players with Mount watching on. Sancho got slightly clipped but carried on. Instead of helping with the attack, the little weasel just looked at the ref with his hands in the air. Ugh.

I don't want to labour the point. I'm very happy with England, how we're playing etc. I just resent Mount starting instead of Jack. That's it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, R.Bear said:

Just because Jack is a better player than  Mount, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t right to start him. It genuinely amazes me that despite England winning 4-0 with ease, some people in here still aren’t getting this point. Southgate picks the team based on the opposition and he’s got it dead right all the way through so far.

Fans are mostly idiots and shouldn’t be listened too, they were calling for Kane to be dropped after the first two games.

I really hope you're not calling me an idiot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It's not Mount he should be replacing, and it's not going to happen when he's not played central for England. He should and would be coming on for Sterling, who has generally been shocking but somehow made himself undroppable by popping up at the right place several times throughout the tournament.

Sterling's assist yesterday was a touch of class that even Grealish would be proud of. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes me laugh some of these comments. Seems a lot of our own fans are buying into the media rhetoric. I can guarantee that these pundits would be fuming not to start the next match, if they had turned the Germany game. I get not bringing him on, he wasn’t needed. If he’s not fit to start then he simply shouldn’t be there.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Pressing. 

I disagree. I think that's a myth. Even if it is true, you're trading a lot of benefits Jack gives you for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Mazrim said:

Right. Almost perfect. I'd have picked the same team except Grealish for Mount, because Grealish is 3 or 4 times better. There's no harm in saying that. Southgate isn't 'right' about playing Mount instead of Grealish because we won the game.

I don't really disagree with that. 

It's all these conspiracy theories and people clamimg they didn't enjoy the win because of it. Its really going a bit far with some. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ThunderPower_14 said:

However I take issue with the idea that Southgate has "got it right" and that winning automatically means the manager is making all the right decisions. You can always be better. We'd absolutely be a better team if Jack played more minutes. I don't think for a second that putting 4 past Ukraine justifies the decision to play so defensively against Scotland, for example. 

The Scotland game was terrible but any team can have a bad day at the office. Frankly it’s ancient history.

There's no point talking about what could happen, all we can do is talk about what did happen. What happened last night was just about as perfect as it could get for England. An easy win, Kane amongst the goals, no injuries, star players subbed and rested early, another clean sheet.

All of this will mean nothing if they lose to Denmark but as of right now, Southgate’s decision have been dead right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Southgate is still trying to find his best side.  As well as Jack, he has tried Saka, Foden, Rashford and now Sancho along with nailed on starters Sterling and Kane.   There is just so much competition and Southgate views Jack as a bit of luxury player I think and to be fair his pressing is not great.

If we are losing in either the semi or final and we are struggling to break them down, he will bring him on at 60 mins to save the day.  I can see it now, Italy 1-0 up and parking the bus, Grealish comes on at 60 minutes in the final, goal and an assist and we win the Euros!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DCJonah said:

I don't really disagree with that. 

It's all these conspiracy theories and people clamimg they didn't enjoy the win because of it. Its really going a bit far with some. 

I enjoyed the win a lot. I can't believe any England fan genuinely didn't if they're being honest.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mazrim said:

I disagree. I think that's a myth. Even if it is true, you're trading a lot of benefits Jack gives you for that.

What is the myth? 

Kane doesn't press, nor does Southgate seemingly want him doing so. So he needs somebody in the middle to shoulder that burden. He has chosen Mount to do that. 

Mount is also a very good footballer, a Champions League winning attacking midfielder, although I agree he hasn't lived up to it in the tournament so far. Southgate trusts him, he's his guy in the same way as Pickford and Maguire. There's not a lot more to it than that, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, WHY said:

. If he’s not fit to start then he simply shouldn’t be there.  

We could skew that argument whichever way we wanted to though.

We can do:

A. Southgate is an idiot / Hates Jack / Is Mounts Sugardaddy etc.

or 

B. It actually shows that Jack is valued by Southgate, enough to be included in the squad and take part, whilst not even being at 80 percent.

I've got an idea of which is more realistic.

Edited by JAMAICAN-VILLAN
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â