I was invited to lunch, so I did not get to see the first half of this game. But according to what I heard I did not miss much. This time England did not even get to score a first half goal. So I guess it must have just been a midfield game with England having ball possession but very little ambition and Slovenia just playing to have time pass. You see, that is one of the problems of this system, if you know you can make it to the next round with a 0-0 draw, you might as well just make sure the opposition doesn't score a goal and then you don't worry about anything else.
The second half I did see, and it was not much. England did control the ball but I did not see any intensity no one giving their all, it seemed more like a friendly game. Today not a single English player should be considered to have played well, not even Pickford because it seemed like he wasn't playing, only touched the ball a couple of times. I kind of am starting to think that the problem might be Southgate, his tactics are too static, their is no variation in what this team does. In short Slovenia played for a draw and I figure England did too.
But what matters is England came out head of its group. What I don't understand is how the second and third place are defined. Slovenia and Denmark drew their individual match, they scored the same amount of goals and received the same amount of goals and have the same amount of points. Do they look at how they did in the qualification rounds? That would not be so smart I guess, because maybe they had differences in the team strengths of those whom they faced. In any case it seems that Denmark has been given second place, but I really want to know why.