whats got to happen?

bluenine wrote:You kidding me?

Rio, A Cole, Beckham, Rooney, SWP, Owen - they are all quality players. From a individual players perspective, England are a top 10 side in the world. There is no reason for England to get knocked out of qualifiers, a team with this much quality should always qualify!!

Its the tactics. Blame Sven all you want, but he is tactically very astute and has proved that repeatedly for over 20 years. People easily forget hoiw close England were to winning the WC in 2002. Sven had built England into a fantastic unit in that world cup, the defeat of Argentina and that close loss to Brazil were brilliant. That was not par for the course for England, that was overachievement. Even his biggest "failure" - the last world cup - he made the quarters... and if it weren't for Rooney loosing his head and getting red carded, anything could have happened. Its a big blow to be down to 10 men in the quarters against a quality team like Portugal, FOR ANY TEAM. Many people here say that England were playing Cr@p (true) but they were doing the business and their defense was working well which is critical for winning a WC. Hell, Argentina almost won the world cup playing like that in 1990.

Sven was sacked at a good time, I don't deny that... IMO the optimal life of a national coach is ideally between 3-4 years, after that they start going downhill... Sven looked like he was running out of ideas in his last 2 years, but he had done well and built a good unit... 3 consecutive QFs are an overachievement, its like if Brazil makes 3 consecutive finals... what England needed was another top coach who could pick it from there and take it to the next level. Instead the FA went for a tactically inept coach and destroyed it all.

The players england have currently, give them to a top tactician and see the difference it makes. Don't expect to win the WC (very few countries can afford such expectations), but as long as you are challenging (like England did in 2002 with Sven) its a good thing. After that, anything can happen.... if you are challenging for 4-5 consecutive cups, you might end up winning one. Thats how it usually works.

TITO wrote:Yup, England does not have better individual players than Russia or Croatia.
It's the system. That's all.

Christ the Redeemer wrote:

Football Genius wrote:

Christ the Redeemer wrote:

The-Frankinsense-Tavern wrote:

Christ the Redeemer wrote:Build an academy for young players and coaches, import coaching techniques from technically and tactically superior countries like Brazil, Germany, Holland, Argentina, halve the prices at Wembley to enable proper fans to get there and support the team, sack the entire FA except Brooking, change the transfer regulations to enable smaller clubs to hang onto their promising youngsters so they don't all end up at 8 clubs from which only half a dozen will actually get the games they need to develop.

Quotas are the thickest idea I've ever heard of. It's just positive discrimination by another name...

plus get 10 year olds playing on smaller pitches

That'd be a start.

Also, sack any coaches who focuses entirely on athletic ability or slags off the players who can actually run with and pass the ball.

All the above already happens with academies, and has been for a decade or so.

I don't believe you, because if anything the technical quality of English players has degraded over that period.

Football Genius wrote:

Christ the Redeemer wrote:

Football Genius wrote:

Christ the Redeemer wrote:

The-Frankinsense-Tavern wrote:

Christ the Redeemer wrote:Build an academy for young players and coaches, import coaching techniques from technically and tactically superior countries like Brazil, Germany, Holland, Argentina, halve the prices at Wembley to enable proper fans to get there and support the team, sack the entire FA except Brooking, change the transfer regulations to enable smaller clubs to hang onto their promising youngsters so they don't all end up at 8 clubs from which only half a dozen will actually get the games they need to develop.

Quotas are the thickest idea I've ever heard of. It's just positive discrimination by another name...

plus get 10 year olds playing on smaller pitches

That'd be a start.

Also, sack any coaches who focuses entirely on athletic ability or slags off the players who can actually run with and pass the ball.

All the above already happens with academies, and has been for a decade or so.

I don't believe you, because if anything the technical quality of English players has degraded over that period.

I couldn't careless if you believe me Saints,

So whether you like it or not, these practises are already in existence and have been since the Academy system has been put in place just over a decade ago.

bluenine wrote:You kidding me?

Rio, A Cole, Beckham, Rooney, SWP, Owen - they are all quality players. From a individual players perspective, England are a top 10 side in the world. There is no reason for England to get knocked out of qualifiers, a team with this much quality should always qualify!!

TITO wrote:Thats really an overstatement when you say that England have better players than Russia or Croatia. I cannot tell much about Russian players, but i know some stuff about Croatian ones. Believe me, and i know it's only my opinion, croatian players are way beyond english players technically.
What is the only and the last thing that England actually won?
And you have generations of players, coaches, systems, media hype and everything else. And they always underachieve, why?
There must be a reason for that.

bluenine wrote:You can say that the Croats have more skillful players, but overall, I think the English players are a bit better. The English game has different strengths, they rely on speed, are more physical, and have a more direct approach to football. If a top coach works with these strengths, he can make a very strong unit.

Different countries always have different styles and strengths. The players skills also vary. Look at the 3 most successful nations, Brazil-Italy-Germany, their skills/strengths couldn't be more different from each other. Now one can argue that Spanish players have been "technically better" than the Germans over the last 20 years, but look at the results. And thats not just coz of teamwork, but also overall german players have been better ie more effective.

TITO wrote:Thats really an overstatement when you say that England have better players than Russia or Croatia. I cannot tell much about Russian players, but i know some stuff about Croatian ones. Believe me, and i know it's only my opinion, croatian players are way beyond english players technically.
What is the only and the last thing that England actually won?
And you have generations of players, coaches, systems, media hype and everything else. And they always underachieve, why?
There must be a reason for that.

Owen wrote:

bluenine wrote:You kidding me?

Rio, A Cole, Beckham, Rooney, SWP, Owen - they are all quality players. From a individual players perspective, England are a top 10 side in the world. There is no reason for England to get knocked out of qualifiers, a team with this much quality should always qualify!!

A. Cole, SWP and Owen are NOT good players technically at all. They cannot pass, cross and in the case of Owen don't contribute anything but goals.

If you compare our squad with Italy, Spain, Germany, France..etc it is a complete embarrassment. About 70% of our players cannot pass the ball consistently well. We select Smith, P. Neville, Brown...these players are completely useless on the ball. No other top 10 country would select them.

Gerrard and Lampard are good players but, again, they cannot pass! (Gerrard is the only "best midfielder in the world" candidate that cannot pass the ball 10 yards and if he does hit the target, he hits it so hard it bounces off the players feet).

We overacheive IMO because of our G&D, which does have it's advantages.

juligen21 wrote:I just hope that Mclaren be man enough to resign, I dont want to see him being sacked, HE FAILED, he did a poor job, he select a wrong team, he didnt had a good tactics, he didn’t motivate the team, he did nothing. He should resign.

juligen21 wrote:I just hope that Mclaren be man enough to resign, I dont want to see him being sacked, HE FAILED, he did a poor job, he select a wrong team, he didnt had a good tactics, he didn’t motivate the team, he did nothing. He should resign.

juligen21 wrote:I just hope that Mclaren be man enough to resign, I dont want to see him being sacked, HE FAILED, he did a poor job, he select a wrong team, he didnt had a good tactics, he didn’t motivate the team, he did nothing. He should resign.

Spankeltoe wrote:

juligen21 wrote:I just hope that Mclaren be man enough to resign, I dont want to see him being sacked, HE FAILED, he did a poor job, he select a wrong team, he didnt had a good tactics, he didn’t motivate the team, he did nothing. He should resign.

Already been sacked this morning.

The doomed England boss will receive a £2.5million golden handshake despite failing to get England to the 2008 Euro finals.

bluenine wrote:What is all this new jive/crap about "technically" good or bad. Thats bullshit, they are either good players or bad.

I am not comparing England with Italy or France, those nations have much better players for sure. I am comparing England with Croatia and Russia, and I believe that England have better players.

So Owen can't do anything but score?? So what?? You need players like that, and if he is quality (and he is), you need to fit that into the strategy.

I think Gerrard is quality. He needs to be played in the right position. Lampard I think is over rated, and he should at best be a Gerrard back-up. SWP is an excellent player IMO. And Becks - if England had passed more to him yesterday instead of keeping on hoofing it up the middle everytime, the result would have been different. Players like Rooney and Rio would make most starting XIs.

This here (all these "we are crap" posts today) is exactly what is wrong. I like to call it "The Beckham Syndrome". When things are going fine, Beckham was a God, and totally overhyped and compared to Zidane. When things went bad, and Becks didn't measure up to a Zidane, suddenly he was $h!t and can't play. All this when Becks has been remarkably consistent and a decent player. He is not the Zidane level, but he is good. Similar thing is now happening with the england team.

Owen wrote:

bluenine wrote:You kidding me?

Rio, A Cole, Beckham, Rooney, SWP, Owen - they are all quality players. From a individual players perspective, England are a top 10 side in the world. There is no reason for England to get knocked out of qualifiers, a team with this much quality should always qualify!!

A. Cole, SWP and Owen are NOT good players technically at all. They cannot pass, cross and in the case of Owen don't contribute anything but goals.

If you compare our squad with Italy, Spain, Germany, France..etc it is a complete embarrassment. About 70% of our players cannot pass the ball consistently well. We select Smith, P. Neville, Brown...these players are completely useless on the ball. No other top 10 country would select them.

Gerrard and Lampard are good players but, again, they cannot pass! (Gerrard is the only "best midfielder in the world" candidate that cannot pass the ball 10 yards and if he does hit the target, he hits it so hard it bounces off the players feet).

We overacheive IMO because of our G&D, which does have it's advantages.

Pele Says No Excuses wrote:

bluenine wrote:You can say that the Croats have more skillful players, but overall, I think the English players are a bit better. The English game has different strengths, they rely on speed, are more physical, and have a more direct approach to football. If a top coach works with these strengths, he can make a very strong unit.

Different countries always have different styles and strengths. The players skills also vary. Look at the 3 most successful nations, Brazil-Italy-Germany, their skills/strengths couldn't be more different from each other. Now one can argue that Spanish players have been "technically better" than the Germans over the last 20 years, but look at the results. And thats not just coz of teamwork, but also overall german players have been better ie more effective.

TITO wrote:Thats really an overstatement when you say that England have better players than Russia or Croatia. I cannot tell much about Russian players, but i know some stuff about Croatian ones. Believe me, and i know it's only my opinion, croatian players are way beyond english players technically.
What is the only and the last thing that England actually won?
And you have generations of players, coaches, systems, media hype and everything else. And they always underachieve, why?
There must be a reason for that.

I must agree that technique is of course important, but it doesnt make one team better than another based solely on technique alone.

England have never had a better technical team than a lot of countries. Then again, neither have Germany, for example. Their strengths lie in other areas, which need to be tapped into.

Eastern European countries have always been technically gifted.

Sinterklaas,Fey kent hem wrote:Problem with the Western youth in general is that less and less kids start to play football!! They prefer to post on forums and all that!

El Gaffer™ wrote:

bluenine wrote:What is all this new jive/crap about "technically" good or bad. Thats bullshit, they are either good players or bad.

I am not comparing England with Italy or France, those nations have much better players for sure. I am comparing England with Croatia and Russia, and I believe that England have better players.

So Owen can't do anything but score?? So what?? You need players like that, and if he is quality (and he is), you need to fit that into the strategy.

I think Gerrard is quality. He needs to be played in the right position. Lampard I think is over rated, and he should at best be a Gerrard back-up. SWP is an excellent player IMO. And Becks - if England had passed more to him yesterday instead of keeping on hoofing it up the middle everytime, the result would have been different. Players like Rooney and Rio would make most starting XIs.

This here (all these "we are crap" posts today) is exactly what is wrong. I like to call it "The Beckham Syndrome". When things are going fine, Beckham was a God, and totally overhyped and compared to Zidane. When things went bad, and Becks didn't measure up to a Zidane, suddenly he was $h!t and can't play. All this when Becks has been remarkably consistent and a decent player. He is not the Zidane level, but he is good. Similar thing is now happening with the england team.

Owen wrote:

bluenine wrote:You kidding me?

Rio, A Cole, Beckham, Rooney, SWP, Owen - they are all quality players. From a individual players perspective, England are a top 10 side in the world. There is no reason for England to get knocked out of qualifiers, a team with this much quality should always qualify!!

A. Cole, SWP and Owen are NOT good players technically at all. They cannot pass, cross and in the case of Owen don't contribute anything but goals.

If you compare our squad with Italy, Spain, Germany, France..etc it is a complete embarrassment. About 70% of our players cannot pass the ball consistently well. We select Smith, P. Neville, Brown...these players are completely useless on the ball. No other top 10 country would select them.

Gerrard and Lampard are good players but, again, they cannot pass! (Gerrard is the only "best midfielder in the world" candidate that cannot pass the ball 10 yards and if he does hit the target, he hits it so hard it bounces off the players feet).

We overacheive IMO because of our G&D, which does have it's advantages.

Bluey - If Italy failed to make it out of the group England did, wouldn't you ask serious questions ?

Toni Kroos wrote:the result of this changes would you see in 10-15 years, do you have so many time

bluenine wrote:What is all this new jive/crap about "technically" good or bad. Thats bullshit, they are either good players or bad.

I am not comparing England with Italy or France, those nations have much better players for sure. I am comparing England with Croatia and Russia, and I believe that England have better players.

So Owen can't do anything but score?? So what?? You need players like that, and if he is quality (and he is), you need to fit that into the strategy.

I think Gerrard is quality. He needs to be played in the right position. Lampard I think is over rated, and he should at best be a Gerrard back-up. SWP is an excellent player IMO. And Becks - if England had passed more to him yesterday instead of keeping on hoofing it up the middle everytime, the result would have been different. Players like Rooney and Rio would make most starting XIs.

This here (all these "we are crap" posts today) is exactly what is wrong. I like to call it "The Beckham Syndrome". When things are going fine, Beckham was a God, and totally overhyped and compared to Zidane. When things went bad, and Becks didn't measure up to a Zidane, suddenly he was $h!t and can't play. All this when Becks has been remarkably consistent and a decent player. He is not the Zidane level, but he is good. Similar thing is now happening with the england team.

Owen wrote:

bluenine wrote:You kidding me?

Rio, A Cole, Beckham, Rooney, SWP, Owen - they are all quality players. From a individual players perspective, England are a top 10 side in the world. There is no reason for England to get knocked out of qualifiers, a team with this much quality should always qualify!!

A. Cole, SWP and Owen are NOT good players technically at all. They cannot pass, cross and in the case of Owen don't contribute anything but goals.

If you compare our squad with Italy, Spain, Germany, France..etc it is a complete embarrassment. About 70% of our players cannot pass the ball consistently well. We select Smith, P. Neville, Brown...these players are completely useless on the ball. No other top 10 country would select them.

Gerrard and Lampard are good players but, again, they cannot pass! (Gerrard is the only "best midfielder in the world" candidate that cannot pass the ball 10 yards and if he does hit the target, he hits it so hard it bounces off the players feet).

We overacheive IMO because of our G&D, which does have it's advantages.