England drew 1-1 with Australia on Tuesday in a game they should have won 4-0 or 4-1, according to Phil Neville. Here are a few things we can take away from the game.

England have trouble finishing teams off

The Lionesses created many chances and near chances playing attractive attacking football. The conversion rate wasn’t great with only one goal to show for those opportunities, alongside a disallowed one. 17 shots, six on target and one goal.

This is a problem shared by many top sides in women’s football. It was the same under Mark Sampson, albeit with a more defensive mindset and set-up.

It is obvious that Phil Neville has set his team to play attacking football. It seems he organises his team to do a mix of possession and direct play when needed. That flexibility is interesting. England have many pacy players who can do a great job on the break.

There is no doubt in my mind that his attacking style will reap the rewards soon. England have so many attacking options that they will end up putting the ball in the back of the net eventually.

Referees are a work in progress, no VAR at World Cup, but hopefully goal-line technology.

The French trio of officials angered the England fans on many occasions. Sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly.

There was a blatant penalty in the second half for a foul on Parris where Foord was nowhere near the ball and hacked down the England forward.  I don’t think the referee or her assistant know the Tom Daley comparisons with regards to the City forward and it was a genuine error from the assistant who was really close to the action.

The other assistant didn’t give a goal where the ball might have crossed the line. The replay was inconclusive. The same assistant flagged Lucy Staniforth offside and rightly so after a forward pass from Kirby when both players were through.

The referee also didn’t award a penalty for a foul on Beth Mead. To me it look perfectly justified as the Arsenal forward ran straight at the defender made contact and went down. Don’t get me wrong, penalties are given in those kinds of situations, but as the forward initiated the contact with the defender, not a foul for me.

https://twitter.com/kunjanmalde/status/1049790490114228225

There’s unlikely to be VAR at the FIFA WWC 2019 simply because not enough women referees are VAR trained so far. Goal-line technology should be available because all the grounds already use it in Ligue Un and Ligue Deux.

The public also remonstrated against the whistling of fouls, but this is simply a cultural difference between refereeing in France and England. If you are used to pate and then given foie gras, you won’t like the foie gras 😁

Beth Mead had an eventful game with no goal to show for it.

The Arsenal forward was involved from the word ‘go’, having three shots going close in fifteen minutes, with a left-footer just a few inches wide of the post. She then got booked for foul play having taken out an Australian player at full force.

She assisted Fran Kirby for the opener and then had another shot that resulted in a corner, and she was of course involved in the first controversial moment of the game when she did not get awarded a penalty, for the reason I have highlighted above.

Beth had a very good game and was praised by Phil Neville :

“She can play as a 7,9 or 11. She will get opportunities in November to try to claim a place. Nikita Parris and Toni Duggan are my number one wingers at the moment. Beth is always a goal threat with her speed”

The only small negative point was her early (deserved) booking and the fact that she carried on fouling from time to time throughout the game. With a “by the book” refereeing style, she could have ended up with a second booking for foul accumulation later in the game. But she was subbed and avoided any potential problem.

Australia are struggling when missing key players.

As expected Australia struggled against France and had to work very hard to rescue a draw against England. They certainly did better against England where they created many chances on the break, while they did not do as well against France.

The possession style from Les Bleues saw them dominate for most of the game, while the more direct Lionesses style with more transitions seems to fit better in the Australian gameplan.

It was clear that leaving five important players at home, left the Matildas a bit short of experience in certain areas and it allowed them to give youth a chance including a 15-year-old who did really well.

At the end of the day, these are the times to experiment and find backup solutions if someone from the first eleven is injured or suspended during the tournament. It also gives the coach clues on some options he tried during the games.

For example, Foord is not as good as a full-back as a forward. She struggled for most of the game against the English wingers and was involved in both penalty incidents. She’s lucky that her foul on Parris was not given, especially as the assistant referee was in close proximity.

The Matildas have had an excellent 2018 and will be contenders at the World Cup next year and I would not be surprised to see them reach the semi-finals in Lyon.

There is a slight balance problem when England are on the ball.

With two excellent attacking full-backs like Bronze and Greenwood going forward, when caught in possession, there are big gaps in the back line and midfield. This is obviously due to the new attacking mentality instilled by Phil Neville in contrast to the previous defensive style from Mark Sampson.

Walsh, Nobbs and Staniforth, who were rotating in possession, left some space for the Australian players to get between the lines quite often. You cannot have opposition players with so much freedom. We saw Australian players managing to break the lines in the middle of the pitch a good number of times.

The three players who should have controlled this problem did not perform as well as expected and Australia had a few good counter-attacking opportunities. You can bet Sam Kerr would have converted at least one of those chances.

This is not a problem against a weaker side, but in the knock-out stages the big teams will have set-up for those kinds of opportunities and exploit the spaces available. Every game is being analyzed by the scouting teams. They will see that kind of weakness and what balls and runs can be made to maximise the damage.