I just can't understand the thinking behind this seems like an insane choice. Does Kane take corners for Spurs?!

It is madness, we had this with LvG and Phil Jones taking corners.

Surely if you play wingers, or wide players, part of their job description is to put crosses into the box, so why when they have a clearly defined opportunity to do so unimpeded via a corner, would you put someone else, whose job it usually is to be on the end of those crosses, to take the crosses instead???

It just makes no sense whatsoever, just allow the players to do their jobs, and stop trying to over-complicate things, and trying to seem like a tactical genius, when it is anything but.

Because he didn't suit the formation - we picked Kane and, up to last night, Kane had performed reasonably well in an England shirt, corners aside. Why on Earth we didn't switch them when it was obvious Kane was off his game I have no idea.

Yes, I understand that Kane was first choice over Vardy, but he should have definitely brought Vardy on last night! I cannot understand his decision not to. A second goal would have sealed this

No I heard a stat that Kane has only taken 7 or 8 corners all season for Spurs.

its just yet another problem with roy hodgson.

get one of your best headers to take the corners

madness. is kane any good at taking them, is he particularly brilliant?

Evidently not.

I mean I'm not big fan of Rooney's set piece ability, but he's got to be a better choice than Kane, surely!

Agreed.

Was shouting at the TV when he put on Milner.

Also have to agree with those who wonder why Kane (who I take it is still a striker?) took the corners. To me it makes no sense whatsoever.

I doubt he was making him. He takes corners for Spurs too so it's not like he's new to it.

There's a difference between "He takes corners for Spurs" and "He has taken the odd corner for Spurs over the course of the season".

Quite simply he shouldn't be England's main corner taker.

Bizarre that hes asking Kane to take the corners. We have so many others who can take a corner, maybe it was part of a some weird strategy, either way Roy needs to sort HIS decisions out. I really wondered why he took off Rooney at 1-0 with still 25 mins to go.

Wonder if Rooney's got a muscle strain. Made no sense to us but Rooney didn't sulk or protest.

I said earlier in the thread that Kane was similar in the Euro U21s last year. Snatched at chances and struggled to make an impact. He's not a tournament striker yet. In retrospect starting with Sturridge might have made more sense and then bringing on Kane or Vardy when he got crocked.

I don't think he is that type of player to make a fuss to come off injury or not.

Can't disagree with your analysis there but what do you mean by him not being a tournament striker? I hear that expression used all the time about certain players but I really don't see how or why Kane would find it harder to score in a tournament match than in the Premier League.

Not anymore anyway. He (Rooney) seems to have mellowed a lot in recent years.

My reading was that it was predetermined (assuming England were in a winning position) to give Wilshere game time to get him back up to match speed.

Nope, not even close to reality.

Hope not, we need leaders out there and he was arguably our best player.

One world class player is enough, often. Bale, I mean. A half fit Suarez was enough for Uruguay in the world cup.

Which part was not close to reality??

It being a local derby?

Wales being top?

Us playing catch-up to them??

To me that is all true.

Yup, and these players tend to more often than note turn up when it matters most, hence why they are classed and regarded as highly as they are.

Good players are good.

We should be beating Wales all day long.

I'm not having this flight of fancy either that Coleman is some sort of tactical colussus while Hodgson is a complete bozo.

I just think that for England players tournaments add an extra level of pressure that affects their game. I don't think Kane is mature enough yet to deal with it yet.