Absolutely but thats what Hodgson is up against. There was outrage at Sturridge going because of his lack of games yet its his lack of games that means he is fresh whilst Kane looks shattered after a tough season.

I dont think Hodgson is being disrespectful but he is taking a chance if England end up with harder opposition in the next round if they drop points. Its just a judgement call really. The knives will be out if it goes wrong but then they would be anyway.

With the situation as open as it is regarding who we might play in the next round, no matter if we finish first or second, then it is up to him really how he sees this panning out.

If he feels that by resting a few players they will come back all the more fresher for it, then he is doing the right thing.

A lot will be riding on their replacements however to get a victory over a team that does have a few players that could cause us problems if we are not careful.

robbed in that game

Were you there?Did someone nick your wallet?

Eh? Most just agree with Rooney being rested - there's a huge difference. Especially as he's allegedly carrying a tight hamstring. Why burn the guy out or risk aggravating an injury.

My point is that two weeks ago everyone wanted him dropped and now people are questioning whether its a risk to leave him out!!

And everyone said Kane had to be first choice as did Alli, and now people are saying they are the first two who should be dropped (after sterling).. That's football for ya.

Well there's still an existing thread about him not having the balls to make the calls.

I think one thing we can all agree on is that he can't really win whatever he does

Got it wrong tonight I'm afraid

Just hope that all those who in the past few weeks drummed on about Wilshere being worth a place in the squad based on a few good games over a year ago admit that they were completely wrong.


His fitness, touch and awareness were an embarrassment.

Nope. Not wrong. Speaking for myself only I never said Wilshere should start, in fact in this topic I said starting him was a mistake. That doesn't mean he should definitely not be in the squad or that I'm wrong for thinking so. Just that he'd be a useful squad member who can be brought on if necessary. I wouldn't have lost any sleep if he didn't go but I'm fine with him being in the squad.

You're one of a couple who I would not expect to admit you were wrong. Thats fine. You were wrong.

Can't say I'm surprised by that response. I can admit to being wrong if I think I'm wrong. But I don't think I was wrong in wanting him in the squad.

Roy out.

Ranieri in. He can get a team playing successfully.

Presumably you're making a joke? Ranieri in cahrge of Greece lost 3 home qualifying games to N.Ire, Romania and Faroe Islands and drew away to Finland. After the Faroe Isles loss he got sacked:

https://www.theguardian.com/football...-faroe-islands

I just knew he would be. I was shouting at the screen 'just keep it simple' but no instead of crisp passing like the other players to move the ball about he just had to take a few too many touches and ended up giving the ball away time and time again.

I'm not a Hodgson fan by any means but I don't think all the changes made any difference. We completely dominated Slovakia, who were playing for 0-0 pretty much from the get go, but just couldn't score.

Wilshere's there because he's capable of a lot better, which is another gamble but one still worth taking.

With the substitutions working to basically put the team back to how it was it seemed a bit needless to make so many changes, momentum and all that. The small positive is that if Kyle Walker is injured we're alright with his replacement.

doubt roy would've got better results even if he was managing England against those teams.

Is this the level we've reached?

We were always here.

Making 6 changes after you had just won (and played decent) and at a time when you need a result, is nearly as bizarre as asking your best striker to take corners

This is the Roy who people like you were saying would play defensive, was scared of making changes etc etc.

We got the result we needed to move on to the knock out rounds. I think some dont seem to understand that.

Many times we've been hanging on to do that, yet here, we were as comfortable as we've ever been.

People have been raving about Wales, but we played them off the pitch, and beat them.

Lol ok... first of all, England failed to make it out of the group under Roy's tutelage only 2 years ago with England's worst performances ever. Secondly, if coming second in a group with the weakest team in the tournament (Russia), Slovakia and Wales was the goal (in a tournament where 3 out of 4 teams progress) - then bravo. But if the goal is to progress as far as possible, then all choices made by Roy are inexplicable from a normal manager's point of view

The teams of 2 and 4 years ago were poor. This squad has developed over the last year really, and could have a decent future.

The top two is the goal in the groups, and we've done that, so how is it a failure?

There are so many that come on here and spout so much crap. If England dont beat everyone easily, they are crap. There is a huge area between being best, and awful. We are in the upper area of the of the teams in Europe at the moment, but not the top.

I support Spurs, and I see England being similar in stature at an international level. Not the best, but are producing some good performances, with a good young side that can give anyone a game on their day.