Inn-ger-land is dull. Going back to my revision is almost more appealing![]()
I watched the first half and fast forwarded through most of the second. I thought USA played fairly well against a much better (on paper) England team. We couldn't mount a sustained attack and lost possession too quickly, which tired out the defense and led to the defeat. We had a couple chances off set pieces, and consistently won balls in the air. As much as I hate to admit it, we could have used Landon Donovan...
England were disappointing for me. Jermain Defoe lacked finishing quality. Gerrard and Lampard still can't play together. And as much as I love Liverpool, I have to say that Stevie G plays out of position a heck of a lot and goes to ground a bit too easily for my liking. The midfield looked better with Gareth Barry instead of Lamps.
All the UK papers called the friendly a pointless match. I think that line of thinking sounds like just another case of the arrogant attitude that has led to the national team missing out on Euro 2008 - while teams not much better than the USA have qualified. Maybe if they took every game more seriously...and if, as Capello says, they are working towards the World Cup, why is Beckham starting? Is he really going to be playing a major role in 2010?