Pentatonic

United's entitled fans expect nothing less than the latest shiny toy, like young kids throwing a fit for the latest video game. Leicester won the title with no overpriced players while United has no titles in recent years and only overpriced players. On another note: what has Southampton gotten in return for selling all its marquee players? A lot of money, but a club perpetually scrapping to stay up. Will this be Leicester's fate?

Where is it written in stone that Leicester can't build their own dynasty around players like Maguire and Maddison? Why are all the "Not Big" clubs seemingly obligated to feed the likes of Manchester City and United their best young players? Southampton has been selling off their best players for the past several years (mostly to Liverpool), and all that the money has gotten them is to turn them into a club perennially fighting relegation -- which will happen soon enough.

Eventually, reliance on set pieces will backfire -- always. When it was so crucial to get that second goal in the first half, and the opportunities actually materialized, England simply didn't know how put it past the goalkeeper in open play (Kane bottling it when 1 v. 1 with Subasic; Sterling passing the ball to an offsides Kane because he has no idea what to do with the ball after dribbling past an entire defense, etc.)

Lost in all the excitement with the win over Sweden was how fatigued Kane clearly was. Possible he was even carrying an injury, too. With the exception of Glenn Hoddle, the pundits were blissfully oblivious to it in the days leading up to Croatia. He didn't do anything wrong in that game, but he was flat-footed and looked visibly uncomfortable. No way he was going to get his energy back in time for Croatia. But how do you bench the captain and team talisman? Tough choice for Southgate. Myself, if I were the manager, I'd have bit the bullet, risked team resentment and public ridicule and outrage, and thrown the dice with Welbeck starting in Kane's place. Fresh legs are always the best avenue to take. If Vardy's groin wasn't such a question mark, I'd have started him over Kane in a flash.

I know that Vardy's declared himself "fit" and that he's back to training with the rest of the squad, but I'd be truly surprised if Southgate uses him at all. If you're Southgate, would you really risk subbing in a player who's already pulled up lame and was unable to participate in the PKs just in the past week? If I were Southgate, I wouldn't (but then again, I'm not Gareth Southgate). I think Vardy only gets in against Croatia (or France, if England wins) if there's a sudden catastrophic rash of injuries to Kane, Sterling, Rashford, and Danny Welbeck. At this point, Welbeck has to be considered higher up in the striker pecking order than Vardy. Of course, I could be completely wrong: in a Hollywood-like scenario, Vardy scores the tying/winning goal against Croatia and/or France, and becomes Sir Jamie...

It looked to me like Alli was annoyed when Southgate tried to hug him when got subbed off. Rolled his eyes and resisted the hug. Random thoughts: Despite two or three good shots on goal that required Pickford, Sweden played like a hard-working but frustrated Championship side -- not much quality there. Hard to tell if Alli (and Lingard) actually turned a corner with that game. And if Sterling couldn't figure out how to finish against Sweden, what are the chances he'll finally put it all together against Croatia? Also, it looked like Kane was a bit fatigued against Sweden, though he didn't do anything wrong. This is where not having Vardy will hurt England (I think he's out for this WC, or, at least, he's not getting off the bench). We may yet see Welbeck, if another striker is required after Rashford gets subbed in.

Shelvey only had a few bad performances this season, but it seemed like every time he crapped out, Southgate just happened to be in the stands to witness it. He had a chance to impress Southgate a few weeks ago at Everton, but was anonymous. Similarly, Southgate was on hand sometime this season to see Smalling commit a howler that cost United a goal. I remember the broadcast panning to catch Southgate's reaction, which was pretty grim. Bad luck/timing for both of those guys.

Spurs fans think that all clubs who are not "Big Six" clubs are beneath them. "Look how much more money we have than Burnley/Leicester/Watford/etc.; losing to them would be a disgrace!" is their philosophy. Funnily enough, they claim being at a financial disadvantage and plead non-League-like poverty whenever they're beaten by ManCity, United, Chelsea.

It can't just be that Leicester is looking for x-amount of millions for Mahrez; the club has to first secure a likewise talented replacement winger to replace him. Mahrez has to have rocks for brains to really think the club would sell him after giving them only two days till deadline to get that replacement. That replacement winger has to be a major player, someone who can unquestionably step right in and help put points on the table. BTW, I'm reading too many articles referring to Mahrez as a "forward". Wingers are still considered midfielders, right?

Yeah, been watching most of the games this season. The difference without Kante was apparent from the get go this season, and Ranieri never had a Plan B to deal with things without him. Should not have let him go without first knowing how to successfully reconfig the team in his absence.

Credit due to Claudio for getting at least one of his signings right.

Did great, but he looks like a penalty waiting to happen.

Hi, all. American football fan, a fan of the EPL for a while. Been following the Foxes pretty closely since the beginning of last season, so I'm kind of a bandwagon Leicester fan, too (though I don't really have a primary English club to support).