Here I don' agree, you don't just try things in international football. There's just not the time (unlike for a club). Any half decent manager picks a basic system and just uses it's varients. If Southgate has tried a 5 xx formation then I presume he will continue down those lines. As stated i don't think it's a viable system for England. What was glaring with this friendly was the lack of attacking options out wide. It was calling out for wingers or 2 up front who are capable of playing down the wings. Not that I thought Vardy was poor, he wasn't, he was great running and pressing however England haven't another striker who proposes the same thing. Rashford epitomised this being ineffective in the role. Has he? That's news to me, I remember once this season for a very specific match with a very specific role for a derby. He's much more familiar with playing an attacking Full back role. Nowhere have I criticised the selection of Walker or Bertrand. All I have done is use their selections to highlight where a 5221 will probably fall short for England. As with the CB's, Who Have England got to fulfill 3 at the back? Cahill was our best element, I thought Smalling was poor until Stones came on and looked even worst. Keane defensively looked solid but didn't have the courage to pass the ball forward. Please name me one English defender who could remotely fullfil that central covering role. I suppose Dier might be capable of looking half decent there but he's far from being a specialist. Unless Southgate is going down the lines of 523, 532 this has no sense even as an option. A 4141 (or variants of 451) has much better options going forward considering the players at England's disposal. I see this as just a complete waste of time, a match that could have been used to develop something useful for the future rather than some option exercise for the whims of the manager and a few pundits who play football on pieces of paper or in a virtual world.