The Next England Squad

Clearly Beckham is the right man for England. He has experience of playing and winning in different leagues. Not sure he knows anything about management, but he's got some nice suits that make him look like a continental style manager.

blutgraetsche wrote:He may go overboard as always but Kroos actually has a point - England struggle against teams they are supposed to break down, there is a lack of creativity and fluidity. This is actually along the lines of what Pierre has been saying for years, so hardly anything new.

Yes, it has been an issue for years, and yet bar 2008 we qualify for every tournament. Hence why the hyperbole CAPS statement is lost on me personally.

Disco Benny wrote:

blutgraetsche wrote:He may go overboard as always but Kroos actually has a point - England struggle against teams they are supposed to break down, there is a lack of creativity and fluidity. This is actually along the lines of what Pierre has been saying for years, so hardly anything new.

Yes, it has been an issue for years, and yet bar 2008 we qualify for every tournament. Hence why the hyperbole CAPS statement is lost on me personally.

your only argument is "we always qualify" (btw you don`t) but this is by far the worst english side that i can remember, not just on individuals, also on tactics

and i think thats a pretty tough group, ukraine, poland and montenegro are no pushovers

i see england struggling in all 3 home games, and when you look at the previous home games (ukraine) where you scrapped a lousy point, i would be worried

110% wrote:

Kroos wrote:in the last 4 WC qualifiers, england has 3 home games, thats an UTTER disadvantage for them

they don`t have the quality to break down teams at home, and the away team will only wait and see what england is capable to do, and hit them on the break

i fully expect NO ENGLAND at the WC2014

It's a good spin but I would be more worried for England if Ukraine or Poland were above them. Respect to Montenegro for doing well so far, there's a big question mark over whether they can sustain it.

really? and i thought they were for a reason group leader, i don`t think that they will start to struggle

Mongrel Hawk wrote:
It may be from the past, but it's not the German I know since my childhood in the 80s.

Did you know that Brazil played in white in the past? White shirt and blue shorts until the WC in Brazil in 1950. The yellow came only in the mid 50s. Black and white TV does´t help, I know. Yellow and white look quite the same.

What I meant is that the DFB gave up the red kit and went back to the traditional green kit for Euro 2012. We'll likely have a green kit as our second kit in Brazil next year, too.

I didn't know that Brazil played in white. White and blue is actually pretty neat, too. Also like the blue Italian kit.

Mongrel Hawk wrote:

blutgraetsche wrote:I meant Kimbo actually. todo actually believes that the yellow shirt gives Brazil a 'psychological advantage'...

And Germany in red are ridiculous! Should be always white or green.


But Germany has certainly the most beautiful international kit. Same as Corinthians. White shirt, black shorts, white socks.

green is hideous for Germany

NEVER again

the white shirt is alright, but as always some are a lot better than others

my favourite is still the 96 one

for some reason, the less classic 1990 one is also a good one

France and Italy are always good

the BEST though

is

obviously

Argentina

followed by PERU

Looks like the Brazil - England friendly will be suspended for safety reasons.


http://www.goal.com/en/news/468/internationals/2013/05/30/4015014/breaking-news-england-friendly-against-brazil-facing?source=breakingnews&ICID=HP_BN_1


Will the Maracana be ready next year?

The game is on

Stupid goal.com. Then let's hope that the roof won't fall down due to a hoofball going wrong...

blutgraetsche wrote:Stupid goal.com. Then let's hope that the roof won't fall down due to a hoofball going wrong...

I thought it was called vertically passing now?

On the ground. Aiming for the stars is still named hoofing.

To be honest, England should go back to kick and rush because the continental approach has hardly been successful for them. They'd probably surprise everyone and be quite successful with it, too, as nobody else plays like that.

Kroos wrote:

110% wrote:

Kroos wrote:in the last 4 WC qualifiers, england has 3 home games, thats an UTTER disadvantage for them

they don`t have the quality to break down teams at home, and the away team will only wait and see what england is capable to do, and hit them on the break

i fully expect NO ENGLAND at the WC2014

It's a good spin but I would be more worried for England if Ukraine or Poland were above them. Respect to Montenegro for doing well so far, there's a big question mark over whether they can sustain it.

really? and i thought they were for a reason group leader, i don`t think that they will start to struggle

They have done amazingly well for a new country with 600,000 population and playing in a stadium with 12,000 capacity. But they have over achieved, while Ukraine, England and Poland have underperformed. However now their opponents will know them better, so they have lost the surprise element. They have a game against the Ukraine coming up so let's see how they do. Draw or win and they could well finish in the top 2, but if they lose the group can change dramatically within 1 or 2 rounds.

blutgraetsche wrote:On the ground. Aiming for the stars is still named hoofing.

To be honest, England should go back to kick and rush because the continental approach has hardly been successful for them. They'd probably surprise everyone and be quite successful with it, too, as nobody else plays like that.

So vertical passing never happens off the ground? I am pretty sure even xavi chips it every now and then

Isn't the "rush" part of "kick and rush" it was now called "pressing"

Haha..... 'rush' and pressing have as much in common as orcs storming a castle and a coordinated siege.

Besides, Xavi / Barcelona are not exactly the best example for a vertical team. But sure, there is nothing wrong with a well timed long ball now and then, as it can surprise a high line of defence. The difference to the good old kick'n'rush times however is that the long ball these days isn't the main weapon in the arsenal, just one of many. It's a way to move past a congested midfield, while in the kick'n'rush days, there was no 'midfield battle' to begin with.

I seriously think that England should consider going back to their own roots. They need to create their very own style of play, not try to just copy others, but rather create something that is in line with their own football tradition. That's the beauty of football really, different styles and different approaches.

There are plenty of national teams that play kick and rush. USA are actually one of the very worst at it infact.

To call kick and rush the cultural traditional style of England is obviously German trolling at it's very best.

Not trolling actually, at least not intentionally. Just put "traditional english football style" into Google and click on the fourth link, or rather the first Wikipedia article.

If you google 'typical german football' you also get descriptions such as 'efficient' and 'boring'. Hardly the blueprint for your current success (albeit 17 years and counting)

Englands traits are playing direct and physical. Not the same as hoofball. People who actually remember england from the 50s and 60s do not describe them as a long ball team. There is a reason why Stoke are a maligned these days. You're being a very patronising German Blut if you honestly believe Englands best hope is to mirror it's worst sides in history which indeed played long ball (a hopeless variant on REAL values of quick forward playing football).

Disco Benny wrote:If you google 'typical german football' you also get descriptions such as 'efficient' and 'boring'. Hardly the blueprint for your current success (albeit 17 years and counting)

Englands traits are playing direct and physical. Not the same as hoofball. People who actually remember england from the 50s and 60s do not describe them as a long ball team. There is a reason why Stoke are a maligned these days. You're being a very patronising German Blut if you honestly believe Englands best hope is to mirror it's worst sides in history which indeed played long ball (a hopeless variant on REAL values of quick forward playing football).

And this is how the teams that reached the semis of the WC in 1990 and Euro 1996 played.

England are pap.

is jones really playing in the right midfield?

it`s like bertrand in the cl final

oh its a 4-3-3

Neymar's going to be a bench player at Barca.

Kimbo wrote:Neymar's going to be a bench player at Barca.

really, so bad?

everytime i switch to brasil-england, i see that brasil has the ball and hart is on the ground

when Ashley Cole broke into the England squad, left back was THE problem position. Now it's the only position England have any quality or depth.

It just goes to show, 12 years is a long time in football.

Kroos wrote:

Kimbo wrote:Neymar's going to be a bench player at Barca.

really, so bad?

everytime i switch to brasil-england, i see that brasil has the ball and hart on the ground

He's not horrible, just wasteful, I could see him getting in Messi's way aswell. For some reason he takes Brazil's set pieces even though though he doesn't seem to be that good at them. I think he has supahstar syndrome.

German own goal v USA


USA 2-0 ALE by hoyno25

What can you say after the first 45 other than Brazil are all over us and they are lacking penetration skills.

That half was for those who doubt just how valuable Danny Welbeck is to us.

Been saying it for years, especially in the days of Heskey & Crouch, that we need/needed these guys because our defenders and midfielders cannot pass with any consistency, so we need a CF who can win the percentage balls and move us higher up the pitch.

Brazil have been taking the piss. Should be about three to the good. Oscar is clearly the standout of their attacking forces. Should build the team around him and not Neymar.

England is parking the bus against a team that never played together FFS. Shots on goal: 15-2.

I disagree with the poster above. Neymar has been the best player so far. Daniel Alves has been horrible as ever. But yeh, Brazil should have been more accurate in attack.

For a team that only play a couple of frindles in a long time and that is testing a new formation, Brazil are doing alright.

Brian2468 wrote:What can you say after the first 45 other than Brazil are all over us and they are lacking penetration skills.

It's difficult to penetrate when you've got 11 big, pinkish Englishmen inside the box. It's like trying to fuck a virgin with a hymen of steel.