That performance last night was nigh on exactly the same as watching the Albion, the only difference was some slow passing between the centre halves and three midfielders. When we got in in the attacking areas we created little, our crossing was poor and our strikers looked painfully isolated - Vardy probably touched the ball three times in the second half.
I'm not having a go at Hodgson, I love Roy. I can't get my head round people thinking what England did last night was good and what Pulis does being the exact opposite. It was just as boring, lacking in exactly the same areas and the end result was the same. Baffling.
Enjoyment is relative and subjective so I can't say why but I've seen England keep the ball better in the first three matches than at any point in the past 20 years. We have genuinely good attacking players with trickery and I've enjoyed the fact we've spent most of the three games on the front foot - unlike Albion who play more like Slovakia did last night.
The game last night petered out because we ran out of ideas, energy and basically Slovakia did an Albion - 10 men behind the ball and defended very deep. The only real way around this is width, stretching them. Therefore, why did Roy keep bringing on central attacking players - Kane, Alli, Rooney (although I could understand Rooney cause he should've started in the first place).
Roy has made some strange decisions lately - which usually means he's run out of ideas.
He needs to get back to basics and build a first 11 with three or four subs who he can rely on for the remainder of the tournament. If we come up against Hungary, Iceland or Austria can you see them not defending for 90mins and try to snatch one just as Russia, Wales and Slovakia did? The same problems need different answers/ responses or you get the same results.............
