Marcus Rashford or Raheem Sterling

username2400323

Who to play against Croatia if not both? I think Marcus Rashford.

(edited 5 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

UWS

Original post by Dragon5555

Who to play against Croatia if not both? I think Marcus Rashford.

Sterling has been useless in the few games at the World Cup. I want Rashford to start but have a feeling we'll play the same team as we did against Sweden.

Reply 2

Angry Bird

Croatia has good defence so England needs to play Rashford from the start if they don't wanna choke

Reply 3

username2400323

Original post by UWS

Sterling has been useless in the few games at the World Cup. I want Rashford to start but have a feeling we'll play the same team as we did against Sweden.

I still think Sterling would be a good player to come on from the bench later on in the game. I want to see Rashford start though.

Reply 4

Foggel

Yeah i agree rashford should start this time, i am tired of seeing raheem and his awkward running

Reply 5

rhaegar452

Sterling lol easy, Rashford couldnt even play well against Belgium's B team

Reply 6

username2400323

While Alli scored I still think he played badly against Sweden so he is someone I wouldn't be too sure about. For the first half in that game he was beyond sht.

Reply 7

Toki the Dumdum

We need Sterling. Don't think Rashford could stretch Croatia in the same way? Some of the balls Henderson played to him in the last game were great and reproducing them, being able to bypass Croatia's midfield, is a good strategy imo.

Reply 8

Mess.

Trashford is trash. He’s not a clever footballer, not a great finisher, not an intelligent footballer and not tactically suited to what’s required of him.

Sterling stretches teams and is incredibly intelligent, he knits the forwards tactically and is just a better player than Trash.

Reply 9

username2400323

Original post by Goz Unlimited

I think Sterling could do a lot of damage if he came on for example at around 70 mins.

Reply 10

Mess.

****ing hell, reading this thread is like listening to the once every two years football knobheads in pubs.

Reply 11

username2400323

Original post by Mess.

Rashford is deadly with his pace and he can get past a lot of players with ease. His finishing like Sterling is not always good but I think he should start.

Reply 12

username2400323

Original post by rhaegar452

Sterling lol easy, Rashford couldnt even play well against Belgium's B team

Wasn't he playing alongside a shtter England team....? Well a team slightly worse than what we played with against Sweden.

Reply 13

Tom191

Rashford is most effective as an impact sub so Sterling should start.

Reply 14

username2400323

Original post by Mess.

****ing hell, reading this thread is like listening to the once every two years football knobheads in pubs.

Rashford is better than Sterling. Fact. Sterling would miss around 50 sitters before he scores a goal.

Reply 15

Mess.

Original post by Dragon5555

Rashford is better than Sterling. Fact. Sterling would miss around 50 sitters before he scores a goal.

Rashford wouldn’t get into the position for those 50 sitters :dontknow:

Rashford will be a generic upper midtable starting striker or a back up striker at United (because he’s English) for the rest of his career. His touch and tactical awareness are nowhere near where they need to be at the top level.