Yeah, I don't think it would've made any difference at that stage, but bringing on Toney was a symptom, or like an indicator species, of England's broken thinking by then. From before the hydration break even, they'd just decided too not have a midfield, to not think about the middle of the pitch at all, to just try and head it out of our box and, when that didn't come off, try and head it in theirs.
The dumb thing is, why keep Kane on if you have no intention of keeping the ball? Kane can be a massive, massive asset to a possession team, but the poor bastard spent the last half hour plus loping folornly about, being asked to play a game that isn't his. Watkins would've run hard at these tiring centre backs, win throws, fouls, maybe even have got one of them sent off - at any rate given them cause to glance backwards when England managed to clear their lines.
Instead, it was as if we just decided to give the ball to their midfield and stand as close to our goal as possible. Who was in their midfield again? What's the worst that could happen?
