The Ultimate England Thread II Watch

cBay
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#21
Report 5 years ago
#21
(Original post by jam278)
Pirlo ain't super human, but we saw what happened last time when he wasn't marked out of the game. I don't think England are going to be stupid enough this time to not bother with that threat. His poor games usually coincide with Italy playing badly. Although they have Verratti now who can do Pirlo's job.

I wouldn't say great attacking players either. Englands attack also haven't gelled and I doubt it will have in time for that game. We aren't the greatest on the counter attack, our tactic in the last few games of qualification was pass to Townsend, we aren't the greatest in possession either and we've been relying on a lot of individual brilliance.

Rooney, Sturridge, Ox and Sterling come into that category, potentially Lallana but it's nothing amazing, Italy probably are similar attack wise with Balotelli, Immobile, Cerci and Cassano, bar Balotelli 3 of the 4 have had good seasons.
But they didn't score? :P

In all seriousness though, people need to consider the conditions. I should have explained properly in my previous post why I'm against man-marking him. It will simply be too humid to have one player closing him down all game.

I'm all for having Sterling playing, but to have him closing down Pirlo all game? It would leave him with no energy left to actually do what he does best and would be a waste.

We aren't great on the counter-attack with players like Rooney, but if we had a front 3 of Sturridge, Sterling, and Lallana/Chamberlain then we would be, and I'd argue that would frighten teams. Back it up with Gerrard playing the role he's played for Liverpool this season, and Henderson and Wilshere/Lallana ahead of him (i.e. box-to-box players that can get up and support the counter-attack), and we would have a very effective team that wouldn't take long to gel (those 3 games would have helped quite a bit)

Basically I'm suggesting the Liverpool midfield & forwards, except Lallana instead of Coutinho and Chamberlain instead of Suarez. Obviously this was before Chamberlain went and got injured, but the point is that it is something Hodgson didn't even consider because he's obsessed with fitting Rooney in.

Oh and let's hope no teams have watched Liverpool play this season or they will have seen how bad Johnson is and target him. Where's Clyne when you need him? I would actually play Jones over Johnson.
0
reply
jam278
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#22
Report 5 years ago
#22
(Original post by cBay)
But they didn't score? :P

In all seriousness though, people need to consider the conditions. I should have explained properly in my previous post why I'm against man-marking him. It will simply be too humid to have one player closing him down all game.

I'm all for having Sterling playing, but to have him closing down Pirlo all game? It would leave him with no energy left to actually do what he does best and would be a waste.

We aren't great on the counter-attack with players like Rooney, but if we had a front 3 of Sturridge, Sterling, and Lallana/Chamberlain then we would be, and I'd argue that would frighten teams. Back it up with Gerrard playing the role he's played for Liverpool this season, and Henderson and Wilshere/Lallana ahead of him (i.e. box-to-box players that can get up and support the counter-attack), and we would have a very effective team.

Basically I'm suggesting the Liverpool midfield & forwards, except Lallana instead of Coutinho and Chamberlain instead of Suarez.
Yeah I've said that England suit a 4-3-3 counter attacking system as well. Originally was up for Carrick but Gerrard has assumed the role in a counter attacking side very well.

I would also include Welbeck somewhere. He's got good pace and work rate and has shown that he's great on the counter(Madrid games) but that depends on the situation.

Agree with your system though. I wouldn't have one player close him down, would get two wide players to narrow or just give him no options to pass to, We don't have a severe lack of pace at the back so we could afford to push up a bit depending on who they play there.

We're going to play 4-4-1-1 though so I don't get why we're having this conversation though
0
reply
cBay
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#23
Report 5 years ago
#23
(Original post by jam278)
Yeah I've said that England suit a 4-3-3 counter attacking system as well. Originally was up for Carrick but Gerrard has assumed the role in a counter attacking side very well.

I would also include Welbeck somewhere. He's got good pace and work rate and has shown that he's great on the counter(Madrid games) but that depends on the situation.

Agree with your system though. I wouldn't have one player close him down, would get two wide players to narrow or just give him no options to pass to, We don't have a severe lack of pace at the back so we could afford to push up a bit depending on who they play there.

We're going to play 4-4-1-1 though so I don't get why we're having this conversation though
I'm just expressing my disappointment at Hodgson's choice of tactics and I like pretending I know better. Of course he has 2 days to change his mind, but then you would question why he didn't try it out in warm-up games.

Apart from that, I agree with pretty much all of this. Lallana, Chamberlain and Sterling all tend to tuck in from the wings so would be able to close down in equal amounts, with Henderson pushing from behind.

I wouldn't mind Welbeck playing. He's unfairly criticised. If he had missed the chances Sturridge did on Saturday, he would have been hounded. Considering Chamberlain's injured, he can slot in there
0
reply
Alex Doran
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#24
Report 5 years ago
#24
(Original post by jam278)
From 60mins onwards Pirlo was clearly MOTM. That's nonsense what you're putting here.Italy do not always play 4-4-2 diamond, they play 4-3-3 and 3-5-2 which are formations that provide more width.Gerrard's passing is inferior to Pirlo's, Gerrard is similar to Alonso passing wise. In terms of long range passing there is nobody better than those two, but Pirlo can dictate a game with short and long passing, Gerrard likes to move the ball as quickly as possible, Pirlo is capable of this but when he needs to shut a game down with slow short passing he can do that as well, he's like a hybrid of Alonso and Xavi, that's not to say he's better than them, but that is his game.But they don't always play down the middle, they play other formations which can provide width. It's not so easy to stop receivers when your midfield duo is Henderson and Gerrard, considering the way Liverpool ship goals game after game, I think it's not really a good idea having to rely on those two stopping receivers.I'd play a 4-3-3 but I'd attempt to close Pirlo down, Either by getting the striker to drop deep, or by getting both wingers to tuck in, this then gives him no space to pass to.There's the final option of pushing up and playing a 4-5-1.
I have just looked at the Italy squad and from my very limited knowledge of Italian football, there is not a single attacking wide player. Perhaps Cerci and Insigne can play out wide or even Candreva but if they do attempt to have a wide formation, it will almost certainly be with players who are not comfortable wingers. There are a LOT of centre mids in the squad and I really believe that they will play 4 centre mids against England (based on options available and previous friendlies.) You say Pirlo was clearly man of the match, I am not denying he is a good player and he had a decent game but I remember watching it with 10+ people and not a single one of them, not a commentator or a pundit even mentioned Pirlo in way people do now at the time until after the penalty. He was given a lot of space but more importantly he had too many options to play to and they were all over the pitch. In Euro 2012 Hodgson had only been in charge for a few weeks and had no time to prepare. It was a squad filled with players based on the clubs they played for rather that how good they were (because he had not had time to evaluate this.) It looked like a squad thrown together at the last minute and a squad missing a captain. This time round there is a real team atmosphere, there has been much preparation and they play as a team now. This time Italy do not have good enough options out wide to risk playing a wide formation so they will play lots of central players and try to control the game. Pirlos impact will be limited as he is getting old and more importantly he will only be able to pass it down the middle or to full backs. If we play 2 wide players (maybe Sterling and Lallana) then it will limit his options down to central players or play the diamond and then limit how often he gets it and how much time he gets.I really believe England will top the group having beaten Italy because we have the players to so and they are a very one dimensional team.
0
reply
Fizzel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#25
Report 5 years ago
#25
I disagree with that on Italy. Italy could be playing any number of formations. 4-3-2-1, 4-3-1-2, the 3-5-2. The key thing with Italy is the have a solid defence, they are pretty safe. The width is going to come from De Sciglio and Abate. With Pirlo, De Rossi and Marchisho centrally, teams are going to struggle to keep the width so there will be loads of space for them to bomb forwards into. There are any number of possible formations for the front players, and that's what is really going to be questioned.

I'd think they might go with the Christmas tree, its what they used heavily in the run up, which would be troublesome for us. That formation they out match us man for man in all our key positions. You'd think Chiellini and Barzagli won't be fazed by Sturridge, Pirlo is capable against pretty much anyone we put at 10. We aren't strong wide, with Ox and Welbeck out, really only have Sterling there to provide some pace. I'd think whoever else in central De Rossi and someone will make Lallana or Rooney drifting in pretty difficult, and they are better than Gerrard Hendo or anyone else in the opposite direction. As for them scoring Balotelli on form can deal with out CB's as he's showed at City, and as we've seen in the warm up we're vulnerable to some direct running and Insigne, Cerci and Immobile will provide that. We might get some width from someone like Baines but if Italy play Candreva on the right he'll track him.
0
reply
Alex Doran
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#26
Report 5 years ago
#26
(Original post by Fizzel)
I disagree with that on Italy. Italy could be playing any number of formations. 4-3-2-1, 4-3-1-2, the 3-5-2. The key thing with Italy is the have a solid defence, they are pretty safe. The width is going to come from De Sciglio and Abate. With Pirlo, De Rossi and Marchisho centrally, teams are going to struggle to keep the width so there will be loads of space for them to bomb forwards into. There are any number of possible formations for the front players, and that's what is really going to be questioned. I'd think they might go with the Christmas tree, its what they used heavily in the run up, which would be troublesome for us. That formation they out match us man for man in all our key positions. You'd think Chiellini and Barzagli won't be fazed by Sturridge, Pirlo is capable against pretty much anyone we put at 10. We aren't strong wide, with Ox and Welbeck out, really only have Sterling there to provide some pace. I'd think whoever else in central De Rossi and someone will make Lallana or Rooney drifting in pretty difficult, and they are better than Gerrard Hendo or anyone else in the opposite direction. As for them scoring Balotelli on form can deal with out CB's as he's showed at City, and as we've seen in the warm up we're vulnerable to some direct running and Insigne, Cerci and Immobile will provide that. We might get some width from someone like Baines but if Italy play Candreva on the right he'll track him.
I'm saying there are 2 options, either of which should work;1. Mark Pirlo out the game with Sterling or Rooney (or even Henderson, works hard) and then try to get as much possession as possible and run at them with Sterling and Sturridge. 2. Play 2 advanced wingers to keep the full backs out of the game and leave Pirlo to do what he wants. If we take out the full backs (they won't leave Sterling, Ox or Lallana behind, they will stay back) then we take out all of their width as they have none up top. This means Pirlos passing will be ineffectual as he can only play centrally and we will have a 3 man midfield to keep a lid on it. We don't need to win this game, a draw will do.If we draw to both Italy and Uruguay then the only way it is mathematically possible for us to go out is on goal difference assuming they draw to each other as well (unless Costa Rica somehow get good). That is unlikely as our last game is Costa Rica so if we know we need 3 goals we will attack and probably get them. I am not saying play for a draw in either game, I am just saying that 2 or more points from the first 2 games is enough so there is nothing to worry about. Italy are not a side who attack in numbers so if we sit back as well, it could well be a dull 0-0 which suits us more than anyone. Also we have fast exciting players to bring off the bench to turn a game around if needs be.May I just remind everyone that Hodgson has not lost a competitive match as England manager in 120 mins! 1 loss as England manager and that was on penalties.
0
reply
Fizzel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#27
Report 5 years ago
#27
(Original post by Alex Doran)
I'm saying there are 2 options, either of which should work;1. Mark Pirlo out the game with Sterling or Rooney (or even Henderson, works hard) and then try to get as much possession as possible and run at them with Sterling and Sturridge.
Italy have more capable passers than just Pirlo. De Rossi, Verratti, Machisho, or even Aqualini can run a game. Pirlo is important, as he's probably the best of them but they will just shift the responsibility to someone else. Its really a must rather than a plan in itself. De Rossi is a better midfielder than anyone in our team, this plan is acting as if he doesn't exist, similar could be said of the others. Final note, I would think every team that has played Juventus has put marking Pirlo out of the game on there to-do list, its not that easy.

2. Play 2 advanced wingers to keep the full backs out of the game and leave Pirlo to do what he wants.
Two problems. This still doesn't stop them from just dominating us through the centre, we're just going to end up super narrow while they enjoy all the possession (exactly what happened last time) and hope that either of the CM's don't break through, or someone like Balotelli or Immobile don't just score from a long ball. Bearing in mind, Italy are hoping to dominate possession and let Pirlo have loads of the ball.

Second problem is the idea of two advanced wingers. Like who? Ox isn't going to make it, Welbeck (doubts). Best option is Sterling in which case he can't play 10 as well.

If we take out the full backs (they won't leave Sterling, Ox or Lallana behind, they will stay back) then we take out all of their width as they have none up top.
Again not so sure, if they play 3 at the back, they will happily do that. Plus you Motta or Rossi are happy to play defensive roles, and pick up those floating AM's. You do the maths, we they have 2 CB's and Pirlo behind the ball. If they push the full backs forward, they still have both CB's and Pirlo behind the ball. That is assuming Rossi is to far forward to cover which he rarely is.

This means Pirlos passing will be ineffectual as he can only play centrally and we will have a 3 man midfield to keep a lid on it.
Again big risk, you plan is to leave De Rossi, Marchisio and possibly the best Regista of the modern game against Henderson, Gerrard, and one other for 90mins and hope they don't create anything.

May I just remind everyone that Hodgson has not lost a competitive match as England manager in 120 mins! 1 loss as England manager and that was on penalties.
Which is the stiffest competition we've faced competitively over 120mins? Sweden perhaps.
0
reply
Alex Doran
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#28
Report 5 years ago
#28
(Original post by Fizzel)
Italy have more capable passers than just Pirlo. De Rossi, Verratti, Machisho, or even Aqualini can run a game. Pirlo is important, as he's probably the best of them but they will just shift the responsibility to someone else. Its really a must rather than a plan in itself. De Rossi is a better midfielder than anyone in our team, this plan is acting as if he doesn't exist, similar could be said of the others. Final note, I would think every team that has played Juventus has put marking Pirlo out of the game on there to-do list, its not that easy. Two problems. This still doesn't stop them from just dominating us through the centre, we're just going to end up super narrow while they enjoy all the possession (exactly what happened last time) and hope that either of the CM's don't break through, or someone like Balotelli or Immobile don't just score from a long ball. Bearing in mind, Italy are hoping to dominate possession and let Pirlo have loads of the ball. Second problem is the idea of two advanced wingers. Like who? Ox isn't going to make it, Welbeck (doubts). Best option is Sterling in which case he can't play 10 as well. Again not so sure, if they play 3 at the back, they will happily do that. Plus you Motta or Rossi are happy to play defensive roles, and pick up those floating AM's. You do the maths, we they have 2 CB's and Pirlo behind the ball. If they push the full backs forward, they still have both CB's and Pirlo behind the ball. That is assuming Rossi is to far forward to cover which he rarely is. Again big risk, you plan is to leave De Rossi, Marchisio and possibly the best Regista of the modern game against Henderson, Gerrard, and one other for 90mins and hope they don't create anything.Which is the stiffest competition we've faced competitively over 120mins? Sweden perhaps.
I tried doing the cool thing where you separate each point but have no idea how so it is just going to be another block of text. It doesn't matter who is in the middle passing it around whether it be Pirlo, Marchisio or Verrati. They are free to pass it about all they want. It is not about closing the supply, it is about limiting his options. For your first problem I agree with the concept but not the content. It does allow them to dominate the middle which I am fine with. I say our 3 midfielders (Gerrard, Henderson and Wilshere/Milner assuming 4-3-3 with no Rooney) sit off theirs and allow them to play in front of us. They can have as much meaningless possession as they want, when they try to push forward that is when we close them down. We will still have enough width as when we have possession our 2 wingers can turn and run at the fullbacks but Italy have no width because the fullbacks cannot get forward and leave the wingers behind. Out wide we have a 2 on 1 every time with a winger and a fullback against presumably Abate and Di Sciglio on each side. England are adaptable and have lots of options coming off the bench, Italy just have more central midfielders and strikers. I would pick Sterling and Lallana out wide (assuming Ox not fit) as they can both work hard (although they shouldn't have to) and won't get tired. Also they can both turn and run at the defence on the break.I would be VERY surprised if Italy play anything other than a central 4-4-2 diamond or a central 4-3-2-1 as they don't have any natural wide players. If they do choose to force a central player out wide then they will be ineffective because they are not used to it and they will be given no time by our fullbacks. I admit Hodgson has not managed many games but during his period we have played Italy and France and were not massively outplayed in either. Also Sweden aren't a bad side and there were some tough away games in the qualifiers. It is not easy to go to Poland or Montenegro for a wet midweek game.
0
reply
Fizzel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#29
Report 5 years ago
#29
(Original post by Alex Doran)
I tried doing the cool thing where you separate each point but have no idea how so it is just going to be another block of text.
Its just use of {QUOTE]}{/QUOTE} functions. There is a little speech box in the options as you reply next to the hash you can use, if you highlight a section and click it, it boxes it.


It doesn't matter who is in the middle passing it around whether it be Pirlo, Marchisio or Verrati. They are free to pass it about all they want. It is not about closing the supply, it is about limiting his options. For your first problem I agree with the concept but not the content. It does allow them to dominate the middle which I am fine with. I say our 3 midfielders (Gerrard, Henderson and Wilshere/Milner assuming 4-3-3 with no Rooney) sit off theirs and allow them to play in front of us. They can have as much meaningless possession as they want, when they try to push forward that is when we close them down.
The thing is, Pirlo is a regista not a spanish AM. He's not looking to get into the pocket, like Mata or someone to dictate play. He wants to sit there infront of the CB's and ping balls all over the pitch. The meaningless possesion is what he's made a career out of. I'd also say the chance of a 4-3-3 is minimal. Last time we used it was Denmark, and it was a mess until we got some pace on through Welbeck and pushed Sturridge central. Rooney has featured at the expense of Sterling through out the warm ups. I can't see Rooney not starting, now even less so.

We will still have enough width as when we have possession our 2 wingers can turn and run at the fullbacks but Italy have no width because the fullbacks cannot get forward and leave the wingers behind. Out wide we have a 2 on 1 every time with a winger and a fullback against presumably Abate and Di Sciglio on each side.
No, Italy are narrow but not that narrow unless they go with the 3-5-2, and then its all irrelevant. Insigne and Cerci are still going to keep the full backs busy, they did against Fluminense.

I would be VERY surprised if Italy play anything other than a central 4-4-2 diamond or a central 4-3-2-1 as they don't have any natural wide players. If they do choose to force a central player out wide then they will be ineffective because they are not used to it and they will be given no time by our fullbacks.
How many natural wide players do we have? Cerci is a natural wide player, Candreva is a wide player. Insigne is as much of a wide player as Lallana is, always looking to come inside. They could play the 4-2-3-1, although it would seem unlikely.

I think we're in real trouble against Italy with the injuries we have now. We really need pace from the wide areas, and without Oxlade and without Welbeck we're asking a lot for a long time of Sterling. Without a quick transition we can't make the most of when Italy turn the ball over, and I think we will need to score possibly twice to get the result we want. Tbh I think we have a far better chance of going through by beating Uruguay, than aiming for draws.

I admit Hodgson has not managed many games but during his period we have played Italy and France and were not massively outplayed in either. Also Sweden aren't a bad side and there were some tough away games in the qualifiers. It is not easy to go to Poland or Montenegro for a wet midweek game.
We got destroyed against Italy,BBC Sport
Italy were vastly superior to England over the course of 120 minutes
France were poor who still outplayed us, the BBC article break the possession down they had 70% possession in the final 15 mins.
0
reply
manchesterunited15
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#30
Report 5 years ago
#30
A draw is most likely, I think both teams recognise the other as the team to worry most about, so they'll both take a draw.
0
reply
Doppelgänger
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#31
Report 5 years ago
#31
(Original post by manchesterunited15)
A draw is most likely, I think both teams recognise the other as the team to worry most about, so they'll both take a draw.
Uruguay are the team to worry about most though; they're touted as a team who can actually go far in the competition. A draw is minimum requirement and a win would be achievable if the team selection is positive.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Alex Doran
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 5 years ago
#32
(Original post by Doppelgänger)
Uruguay are the team to worry about most though; they're touted as a team who can actually go far in the competition. A draw is minimum requirement and a win would be achievable if the team selection is positive. Posted from TSR Mobile
Call it blind patriotic faith but I can't see England losing to Italy and I really think it will be Uruguay who go out. Suarez (if he even plays) will be far from match fit and the defence is just not good enough to cope with any sustained pressure. I also think Costa Rica will spring a surprise, not enough to qualify but don't think they will lose all 3. They will draw at least 1 and I can see that being against Italy.1. England2. Italy3. Uruguay4. Costa Rica
0
reply
manchesterunited15
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#33
Report 5 years ago
#33
(Original post by Doppelgänger)
Uruguay are the team to worry about most though; they're touted as a team who can actually go far in the competition. A draw is minimum requirement and a win would be achievable if the team selection is positive.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Nah, they came 5th in qualifying and needed a playoff to get through, their best player isn't fully fit and apart from their front two the team is nothing special.
0
reply
manchesterunited15
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#34
Report 5 years ago
#34
(Original post by Alex Doran)
Call it blind patriotic faith but I can't see England losing to Italy and I really think it will be Uruguay who go out. Suarez (if he even plays) will be far from match fit and the defence is just not good enough to cope with any sustained pressure. I also think Costa Rica will spring a surprise, not enough to qualify but don't think they will lose all 3. They will draw at least 1 and I can see that being against Italy.1. England2. Italy3. Uruguay4. Costa Rica
I'm not as confident as you but I do think we'll go through. People are overrating Uruguay based on 2010 without realising they were so lucky.
0
reply
manchesterunited15
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#35
Report 5 years ago
#35
66 final is on now
0
reply
Nichrome
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#36
Report 5 years ago
#36
Why is Rio a pundit now? The guy is a moron - can barely string a sentence together. Can't stand listening to his sloth, monotone voice.
0
reply
Doppelgänger
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#37
Report 5 years ago
#37
(Original post by manchesterunited15)
Nah, they came 5th in qualifying and needed a playoff to get through, their best player isn't fully fit and apart from their front two the team is nothing special.
That shows how little I know about Uruguay aha. Suarez and the fact they're a South American must be the only reasons the media have given the impression that they're a genuine threat then. Either way, they're a step up from our recent friendlies in which England hardly excelled.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
jam278
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#38
Report 5 years ago
#38
Uruguay are not really a threat, only advantage is that they are better used to the weather.

They got ****ing lucky in 2010, I'm not even being biased here but come on how can you miss a game deciding pen in the 120th min, then lose on pens and with no disrespect, Ghana isn't really the best of teams, well in your eyes they aren't anyway. But if Ghana took Uruguay to the wire, what is there to say that England and Italy won't be able to do so.

Also remember that in the copa america Brazil had been taken out early, although credit to Uruguay for taking out Argentina.

England just have to aim for 2 draws and beat Costa Rica. That's not too hard to do. If we wanted to park the bus we have the players capable of it, we need a DM badly though
0
reply
Fizzel
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#39
Report 5 years ago
#39
(Original post by jam278)
we need a DM badly though
The human wrecking ball that is Phil Jones.




Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
manchesterunited15
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#40
Report 5 years ago
#40
(Original post by Doppelgänger)
That shows how little I know about Uruguay aha. Suarez and the fact they're a South American must be the only reasons the media have given the impression that they're a genuine threat then. Either way, they're a step up from our recent friendlies in which England hardly excelled.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Yeah, its by no means a guaranteed 3 points but we should beat them

(Original post by jam278)
Uruguay are not really a threat, only advantage is that they are better used to the weather.

They got ****ing lucky in 2010, I'm not even being biased here but come on how can you miss a game deciding pen in the 120th min, then lose on pens and with no disrespect, Ghana isn't really the best of teams, well in your eyes they aren't anyway. But if Ghana took Uruguay to the wire, what is there to say that England and Italy won't be able to do so.

Also remember that in the copa america Brazil had been taken out early, although credit to Uruguay for taking out Argentina.

England just have to aim for 2 draws and beat Costa Rica. That's not too hard to do. If we wanted to park the bus we have the players capable of it, we need a DM badly though
Its not even that, its mostly the fact that the top team in their group completely fell apart, giving them an easy run to the semis.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Biology Paper 3 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (212)
14.86%
The paper was reasonable (800)
56.06%
Not feeling great about that exam... (310)
21.72%
It was TERRIBLE (105)
7.36%

Watched Threads

View All