England were dreadful although part isn't reading too much into it when you consider the long season after the European Championships and the lack of enthusiasm for this international break. For that reason it might have been better to try some different players (Maddison!) instead of playing Kane in every game so he can break a record he'll break at some point anyway. Instead Kane is even more tired and will no doubt be worn out again when the World Cup arrives, and not enough is known about alternative players across the pitch.
Atleast Mancini left some senior players out and looked at some new faces. And Italy still looked more coherent than England.
Kane's not better than Rooney was, and I feel a number of these England players aren't as good as the media thinks they are. The only one whose underrated these days is Maguire, and that's only because he's become a figure of fun.
No, he's not. I remember Rooney doing amazing things at 16 against a quality Arsenal side that I've yet to see Kane do against this rather shite Arsenal team. But there seems to be this clamouring to get Kane the top goal scorer record. Maybe its because he's never won a trophy, this could be his trophy.
Maguire tends to be better for England, maybe its playing with better players, playing behind McFred would give me the jitters too. Probably better coaching too.