LATEST ENGLAND SQUAD ANNOUNCEDAZURRI

Shearer and Wright's brigade

Super Madrid wrote:

Otto's Olympic Dream wrote:

Axeslammer wrote:

bluenine wrote:

Axeslammer wrote:How the hell would a draw put England in the driving seat ?!

A away draw against Croatia will be very good for england, and will give them slight advantage.

It makes sure they're not out of it, that's something completely different than being "in the driving seat"...at least in my book it is.

Then again : in my book there might just be a couple of Croatians that could make the English team. Shows how deluded I am

Well the annoying thing is that most of us don't doubt this at all. Yet still, even now, when the perception of English football is at a major low amongst the fans, we STILL get called out for arrogance and hype, based on a few quotes here and there picked up in the media.

Who has been calling you arrogant? the england fans on this board havent been arrogant really because i gues they have eyes.
i think it is mostly the media(pundits,commentators etc.) that give the bad image.
allthough i cants say too well i do think there has been a slight chance in tone after you missed the euros but you can tell me better?

Regarding the formation why hasnt Ashley Young been giving a chance? wasnt he the highest assister last season?
Also i dont really believe when people say that England simply arent good enough. its all about getting players to work together. i mean Croatia looked very good at times in the Euros but they arent exactly filled with stars.

I was reading reaction to the England fans booing the English team off at half time. According to some non-English fans, this was apparently arrogant behaviour, because it shows we think we are better than we are and have a divine right to be beating teams like Andorra.

I found this incredible- the majority of booing stems more from the amount of money these players earn, yet can't put a bunch of part timers to the sword. I dont think that is arrogant, it shows we have become disillusioned with the arrogance of the players thinking they deserve to be paid so much money, yet can't perform internationally.

As for the media and the pundits- I stopped listening to them a long time ago. IF anything, they are indeed at fault for the hype that has turned off so many fans, both english and no english

England fans are right to boo them for not being able to beat Andorra more convincingly. its ANDORRA!!! they should get spanked just like Germany does with the smaller sides.
also i think booing players because of their wage doesnt make that much sense. whether they get paid 50 k a week or 100 k is not gonna to much difference imo. what is disgraceful is that despite the fact these players play for such big clubs they are soo poor for the national team. but ultimately the problem lies not with the players but the manager. the last 3 managers have used the much the same approach and gotten the same out of the players.

Watched the Croatia game last night, there goalie seems to shaky. Just watched the England game and it is easy to see the lack of confidence in the side. Attacking from the get go hurts against these teams moving the ball around all over the park and drawing them out then letting them play a little would of given England better shape. I can see why people feel Capello has changed nothing. I'm looking for the small things happening. First touch, final touch, this picked up after the first half.

Otto's Olympic Dream wrote:

Well the annoying thing is that most of us don't doubt this at all. Yet still, even now, when the perception of English football is at a major low amongst the fans, we STILL get called out for arrogance and hype, based on a few quotes here and there picked up in the media.

Parky's claim that if you'd draw in Croatia you'd be in the driving seat and would get 4 points against them tells another tale

England winger Theo Walcott insists he can
cope if Croatia defenders attempt to "batter" him off the ball in
Zagreb on Wednesday night.
Walcott was given his first England start at the weekend and
Andorra players tried to bring him down whenever he built momentum down
the right flank.
"I always get battered. I'm used to it now and it doesn't bother me at all," was the Arsenal forward's response.
The 19-year-old feels his pace can help England if they play on
the counter-attack against Croatia, in a match that could define their
World Cup qualifying campaign.
Slaven Bilic's defenders would be expected to use the same
approach as Andorra's if Walcott gets into the game, but the teenager
said: "The main thing is to ignore them and get up.
"If you don't, they know they have got you in their pocket. You
just have to get up give them a little smile and they know you will be
at them again.
"That's what you have to do - remind them that you won't go
away. I will keep doing the right things and maybe the referees will
recognise it."
Walcott, after famously being taken to the 2006 World Cup by
Sven-Goran Eriksson but never used, has an England career that spans
three managers and he senses a different atmosphere under Fabio
Capello.
"It is more intense and I am enjoying it a bit more," he said.
"I am not saying I didn't enjoy it before but there is a buzz around
the whole team this year.
"We want to do well for everyone involved with England. It is
more enjoyable because everyone is just playing their football. It is
when you enjoy it that you play your best."
Walcott now wants to add a final ball to his other attributes.
"Some people are negative about my final ball," he said.
"Sometimes it's not too bad but I am learning and I do practice in
training every day.
"I have had quite a few assists as well. The boss knows I'll do it.
"It is like Cristiano Ronaldo, he came to Manchester United in
his first year, showed some brilliant tricks and he is 23 and the best
player in the world. I am not saying I will be like Ronaldo, I will be
myself."

And ?
he easily got bullied in the Andorra game 20 mins in ?

The kid is starting to believe his hype.

Axeslammer wrote:

Otto's Olympic Dream wrote:

Well the annoying thing is that most of us don't doubt this at all. Yet still, even now, when the perception of English football is at a major low amongst the fans, we STILL get called out for arrogance and hype, based on a few quotes here and there picked up in the media.

Parky's claim that if you'd draw in Croatia you'd be in the driving seat and would get 4 points against them tells another tale

I never said we would get 4 points. I said a draw in Croatia is to our advantage, because we have a better chance of beating them at Wembley than we do in Croatia.

Super Madrid wrote:
England fans are right to boo them for not being able to beat Andorra more convincingly. its ANDORRA!!! they should get spanked just like Germany does with the smaller sides.
also i think booing players because of their wage doesnt make that much sense. whether they get paid 50 k a week or 100 k is not gonna to much difference imo. what is disgraceful is that despite the fact these players play for such big clubs they are soo poor for the national team. but ultimately the problem lies not with the players but the manager. the last 3 managers have used the much the same approach and gotten the same out of the players.

I disagree - the England players seem more concerned about fighting for bigger wages than they do for playing for their country. In the last 26 years of my life supporting England, this bunch are the greediest I've known. It makes it very difficult to accept bad performances from them as a result, despite the fact that booing often brings out bad performances, and we should really be getting behind them. But with players like Ashley Cole in the side, who lets be honest, is very unlikeable to say the least, it makes it almost impossible to do anything else other than boo when they keep playing badly.

Your comments about the managers is interesting.

Because in 2002 and 2004 tournaments - there were signs of England progressing under Eriksson. We played some good stuff in 2004; against Croatia we won 4-2, Switzerland we put to the sword 3-0, we played a strong France side and should have won had Beckham not missed a penalty, and then against Portugal we lost Rooney and yet still managed to battle a 2-2 draw against the hosts and had a last gasp goal disallowed.

So whilst we were not World beaters, we were good, and heading on an upward slope under Eriksson.

Problem Eriksson had though was he was unwilling to drop the big named players in the side who began to be swallowed up into the hype leading up to 2006.

2006 was poor, then Mclaren came along and did exactly the same thing. Playing Lampard/Gerrard together, he actually stumbled across a team on form when he had many injuries and brought in Heskey and Barry for the Wembley game. and lo behold, we routed Russia 3-0. Then resorted back to the tried and tested for the remaining games. Disaster.

Now Capello has tinkered with the idea of playing differing players to the norm, and that is why we need to keep the faith to a degree. However he still struggles with the dilemmas of old and has yet to embrace the new.

Why make Terry captain again? He should have sent out a message of progression by picking Rio.

He then should have seen that Beckham now offers nothing but set piece ability. And in Ashley Young has the perfect replacement - top set piece assister and crosser of the ball in the Premiership last season.

He should then consider that Rooney needs to be dropped, given a rest from international football and allowed to work on his tactical discipline before returning.

Never lay Lampard and Gerrard together again, and work on a tactical formation that doesnt include a 4-4-2 plan A,B and C.

Whilst I dont pretend to know everything about football, this seems clear to me - all 3 managers have made the same mistakes its so blindingly obvious.

The problem is clearly that for us it is easy to say this, but such is the influence of the players that it seems nigh on impossible for them to make the big tough choices without upsetting the natural order of the team. For example, John Terry is captain, Frank Lampard is his best friend. Whose name will JT be whispering into Capello's ear everytime the team is picked? Fat boy's of course. If he doesnt pick him, all his Chavski buddies will be throwing hissy fits no doubt. I thought Fab Cap was the man who never bowed to player power, but so far I'm not convinced

great post TWERP agree almost entirely

you my as well close your eyes and die now because you'll do no better in the rest of your miserable life.

What I will say is that it is still early days, let's not judge or worry about Capello just yet. I'd settle for uncomfortable qualification and teething problems if we see progress, and you can't measure progress until halfway through this group. We will qualify for the world cup, by hook or by crook.

A compliment from you Hysen is about as rare and appreciated as a bout of Dengue Fever

Leaving aside the fact that you are a c**t for a second, I agree with your sentiments about Capello. I was particularly warmed right down to my cockles to hear he apparently bollocked Rooney and Joe Cole for dropping deep and leaving Heskey isolated. About time this point was hammered home, especially with regards to Wazza Roo.

Good article about the (fairly) recent England booing phenomenon:

Booing: Like Licking Your Sister`s Nipples

Posted 08/09/08 12:55
[url=mailto://Your friend's email address?subject=Football365.com - Booing: Like Licking Your Sister's Nipples - John Nicholson - Football365 News&body=I found this story on World Cup 365, thought you'd be interested: http://www.football365.com/john_nicholson/0,17033,8746_4117125,00.html]Email[/url]PrintSave





Some England fans can be hard to like. Chanting support for the BBC over Setanta, singing 'No surrender' , the bellowing of the awful 'national' anthem which pledges loyalty to inbred privilege, the dreadful predictability of the Great Escape and Self Preservation Society music makes them come over as awful reactionaries and lends an air of desperation to every England game

But one thing England fans have become really good at is booing their own team.

England being booed off at half time in Andorra surprised no one. But there was a time not too long ago when England being booed by their own fans was utterly unthinkable.

You just didn't boo your own side; you only booed the opposition.

But today booing is commonplace throughout the game. If your team plays poorly for 45 minutes, they'll invariably come off to a hail storm of it. It's not pretty. I don't like it.

This is initially very puzzling to someone of my generation. I have to tell you, the very idea of booing Bobby Moore and the boys was absolutely unthinkable even when we were rubbish. It would have had the moral equivalence of s**tting in your granny's mouth. It was something that it just didn't enter your head to do.

It was just disrespectful; such things did kind of matter back then. Ok, they were playing poorly and we all had our own personal I-can't-believe-he's-been-picked-again player (mine was usually Martin Chivers) but we still didn't boo them.

But in the last ten years booing seems to have become endemic and a totally acceptable way for fans to vent their spleen. They may be right or wrong, I don't know. I do know I've never booed my club, the Boro, or England at any time despite extreme and persistent provocation to do so.

To me it feels wrong. Wrong like licking your sister's nipples. It's just a cultural assimilation I made at an early age, like talking to cats, eating my greens and ogling exposed cleavage. Its soul deep now and no amount of godawful players and performances can make me change. I ain't booing no one. Never have, never will.

Clearly though, I'm in a minority now. So why have things changed so profoundly? Is it all a consequence of the interactive age where everyone thinks they've a right to be heard? The phone-in culture of outrage and indignation; maybe it's an extension of that.

Usually the answer to what is wrong with football is, 'money'. It's an easy and commonplace thing to say that money has ruined football.

Is that right though? I'm a massive Jimmy Bullard fan for all of the reasons regularly mentioned here. But Jimmy is a rich bloke too. Football has made him wealthy. Jimmy is a millionaire. But we don't mind Jimmy's money. We don't begrudge him it. He plays with a joy and love of football and he's not an arrogant arsehole. Jimmy being rich seems like one chalked up for the good guys.

So it can't be the money per se which has changed fans into boo-boys. I would suggest rather it is a reaction to the perceived unearned and undeserved wealth and respect that has led to this new attitude from fans towards players. At core it is 'you're supposed to great but you're not and yet you're rich beyond avarice.'

When you watch Frank Lampard and his furrowed brow playing another anonymous game for his country knowing that if he worked a 40 hour week, as most people typically do, he would be earning roughly £3,750.00 per hour; that's around £1.04 per second, it is hard for the bile not to rise in your throat, especially if you work hard for little money. We feel that if someone is to so be so lavished upon in life they should be earth-shatteringly good. They should be a genius. It's not unreasonable.

The booing seems to have become a way for fans to momentarily morally redress the situation. To let a player or team know that we know they are not worthy of their status or their riches and we have withdraw our support for them. Of course this is a bit crazy because if in the second half Frankie knocks a couple in - not likely I know - then the booing goes away and we all cheer. Football's ficklest fans do no one any favours.

Our relationship with our footballers has never been more complicated, especially at national level. I must confess on Saturday at least 25% of me was kind of hoping we got beat. I feel like I'm confessing to punching a pensioner saying that. I never, ever used to feel that way. Never. It's changed recently. Behind it is getting a thrill at seeing over-lauded, over-rewarded men making themselves look foolish. Schadenfreude is a seductive if destructive mistress. I'm not proud of it.

I've been to games where there is an air of indignation, of insult around. Like we, the fans, are having the p*ss taken out of us by players. Most usually this takes the form of a complaint which always begins 'they're paid all that money...' or 'he's on 40k a week...'

So yes, the booing is probably largely all about the money. Money may or may not be spoiling the quality of the football on the pitch but it has messed with our heads, with our psyche and our soul. We're obsessed and repulsed and yet covetous of it.

In 2008 players and fans are trapped in an unhealthy, mutually abusive relationship. Both sides feeling abused and misunderstood. We used to all be on the same side. We celebrated and commiserated together. Not now. Now failed players slink off in cars that cost more than many people will earn in decade to live a life of luxury we cannot imagine.

The players think we don't understand the pressure they're under. And of course, we don't. Being exposed as a fraud at international football must be hard to take game after game.

After the game John Terry was gracious enough to say that after the half time boo-fest, the fans 'got their reward' with Cole's two goals.

Our reward? That was a reward was it? Feel patronized? Yeah me too.

Maybe he just chose his words badly, it's easy enough to do, or maybe some people unintentionally reveal more about themselves than they realize. One thing I'm pretty sure of is that few of us felt rewarded on Saturday night.

The late great Bobby Moore, a man of class and dignity who was England's finest captain and finest centre-half, would certainly have known that. We didn't boo Bobby.

Given all this, it's perhaps surprising that booing is the only expression of disgust by the paying public. Perhaps its surprising fans don't routinely drag the players off the pitch by their hair, strip them naked and paint them with tar.

Should we really sit their quietly and take it like we used to? Should we really cheer on people who we often really dislike? I just don't know anymore.

I think we all want to like and support the players really. We want them to be 11 Jimmy Bullards; regular Joes who worked hard, got lucky, made good and give everything they have in return. People about whom you can say, 'fair play to the lad'.

On thing is for sure, the booing isn't helping matters improve on or off the pitch. Despite their manifest international failure the players still get richer and more distant in their gated mansions, the transfer fees are still massive and the agents, administrators and assorted ar*eholes still cream it up day in day out no matter how many times or how hard you boo them. Much like Frank Lampard in England's midfield, it is having no effect at all. Indeed, it may be making things worse.

So maybe it's time to change; time to stop booing them; booing suggests we're taking it all too seriously. No, it's time to start laughing at them instead. Laughter is much more powerful. It is insulting in a way which spiky aggression just isn't. Players are used to aggression but they're not used to being laughed at by tens of thousands of people. And ultimately, it would be a more appropriate response to the situation. Let's face it, when someone is paid £1.04 per second to play football, the situation has become ludicrous.

As another hapless long ball goes out of touch, as another cross hits the first man, as another dead ball is kicked into the wall and when an England player's first touch bounces wildly off their expensively sponsored boot, what better response than gales of hysterical laughter?

In a world gone mad, it's the only sane thing left to do.

Super Madrid wrote:
England fans are right to boo them for not being able to beat Andorra more convincingly. its ANDORRA!!! they should get spanked just like Germany does with the smaller sides.also i think booing players because of their wage doesnt make that much sense. whether they get paid 50 k a week or 100 k is not gonna to much difference imo. what is disgraceful is that despite the fact these players play for such big clubs they are soo poor for the national team. but ultimately the problem lies not with the players but the manager. the last 3 managers have used the much the same approach and gotten the same out of the players.

dont forget we played with a complete new midfield, i think its a very good result, and with a complete new defence with tasci and westermann,

engalnd had lost with there b-side

Otto's Olympic Dream wrote:Your comments about the managers is interesting.

Because in 2002 and 2004 tournaments - there were signs of England progressing under Eriksson. We played some good stuff in 2004; against Croatia we won 4-2, Switzerland we put to the sword 3-0, we played a strong France side and should have won had Beckham not missed a penalty, and then against Portugal we lost Rooney and yet still managed to battle a 2-2 draw against the hosts and had a last gasp goal disallowed.

Good post apart from some parts in this bit. I really don't think we were unlucky against France. We sat back with about 40 minutes to go and got deeper and deeper and some of Sven's subs were fairly strange. In the Portugal game his subs were just plain bizarre. Vassell for Rooney when we needed presence up front, Hargreaves to play on the left wing and Philip Neville for Scholes.

Parks lives wrote:

Otto's Olympic Dream wrote:Your comments about the managers is interesting.

Because in 2002 and 2004 tournaments - there were signs of England progressing under Eriksson. We played some good stuff in 2004; against Croatia we won 4-2, Switzerland we put to the sword 3-0, we played a strong France side and should have won had Beckham not missed a penalty, and then against Portugal we lost Rooney and yet still managed to battle a 2-2 draw against the hosts and had a last gasp goal disallowed.

Good post apart from some parts in this bit. I really don't think we were unlucky against France. We sat back with about 40 minutes to go and got deeper and deeper and some of Sven's subs were fairly strange. In the Portugal game his subs were just plain bizarre. Vassell for Rooney when we needed presence up front, Hargreaves to play on the left wing and Philip Neville for Scholes.

There was no doubt faults to Sven's tactics, but generally speaking that was a fairly successful tournament. We did drop deep against France, yet still should have won - against the French at the time, no mean feat.

We've gone backwards since that tournament, not really learnt or progressed tactically or personnel-wise.

Good posts from you Bernd.

I think it's the comments from people like Terry and Rooney "they just wanted to spoil it for us, they know they're not as gifted as us... but we did a professional job" that grate. If you're gonna come out with such bitter and arrogant remarks, then beat them 6-0 or just shut up. Leaves a bit of a nasty taste in the mouth and it's far easier to sympathize with the Andorran point of view that they're doing what they can, not competing on a level playing field as they are, and that as their coach said, "Give me England's players and I'd beat Andorra more than 2-0."

The personality thing does come into it a lot – even I'd have a lot of time for England if they were ten Jimmy Bullards...

They were spells against France where we didn't get out of our own half for at least 5 minutes. It was like an FA cup game where a Premier League club faces a League one team, or even worse like when we faced Andorra on Saturday!

There is nothing unlucky about conceding goals when you play like that.

I just spent the last 30 minutes daydreaming about licking TWERP's sister's nipples.

brb

Glenn Hysén wrote:I just spent the last 30 minutes daydreaming about licking TWERP's sister's nipples.

brb

Was I there?

Allez les rouges wrote:Good posts from you Bernd.

I think it's the comments from people like Terry and Rooney "they just wanted to spoil it for us, they know they're not as gifted as us... but we did a professional job" that grate. If you're gonna come out with such bitter and arrogant remarks, then beat them 6-0 or just shut up. Leaves a bit of a nasty taste in the mouth and it's far easier to sympathize with the Andorran point of view that they're doing what they can, not competing on a level playing field as they are, and that as their coach said, "Give me England's players and I'd beat Andorra more than 2-0."

The personality thing does come into it a lot – even I'd have a lot of time for England if they were ten Jimmy Bullards...

Well to be fair to Walcott in particular, Andorra were dirty as sin and performed nothing short of GBH on the young lad for most of the game.

Rooney and Terry have little room for talk considering the combative nature of their games.

It can't be denied that Andorra are a deeply ugly side, playing deeply ugly football with ugly tactics and little adventure.

But before we can give them grief about it- thats not wholly unlike how England have been playing recently, despite having the players that suggest it shouldn't have to be that way.

So whilst Andorra have good reason to play like that, what is our excuse?

I'll still carry on supporting England whatever happens, despite the fact that the team is not very likeable, as its in the blood. I just won't feel so bad about it when they lose as it was in the past.

I compare this side to the side in 1996 side when I last cried at an england game, and not only were we a better team back then, we had much more likeable players.

Sheringham, Redknapp, Gazza, Southgate, Pearce, Mcmanaman, Le Saux, Seaman and so on - all likeable fellas. Even Shearer is less of a tool than the majority of these guys playing for us currently

Wasnt Le Saux a bit of a wanker?

borocooper wrote:Wasnt Le Saux a bit of a wanker?

If reading a book instead of the daily star makes you a wanker, then yeah he was

So because he reads books he's a likeable guy?

le saux was ok, but always thought redknapp and sheringham were tw@ts

Of those you mentioned, Redknapp, Southgate and Le Saux nice guys I'll give you (I've met the former, indeed seemed a jolly nice bloke)...

f@ck off with your Sheringham and Pearce nice guy Cr@p tho – and you forgot one utter hero you raving spudulike bellend!!

borocooper wrote:So because he reads books he's a likeable guy?

Well it does help, as in he actually seemed to be able to string a sentence together and have an opinion, and appeared likeable in interviews. Unlike the chavvy twats we have in the team at the moment

Dont know then, just always seemed to come across as a bit of a knob to me. On the pitch anyway.

Allez les rouges wrote:Of those you mentioned, Redknapp, Southgate and Le Saux nice guys I'll give you (I've met the former, indeed seemed a jolly nice bloke)...

f@ck off with your Sheringham and Pearce nice guy Cr@p tho – and you forgot one utter hero you raving spudulike bellend!!

f@ck off Allez you pulsating purple helmeted warrior : Stuart Pearce was a LEGEND and if you read his autobiography there is absolutely no way you couldn't like the fella: He was studying to be an electrician and playing non league football before Cloughie bought him and thrust him into the top tier of football. You couldn't come across a more salt of the earth bloke who played football like most of us would have done given half the chance - totally dedicated and passionate, like his life depended on it.

Sheringham was a legend too; so he dated a few fitties - so what, he hated Andy Cole, and lets be honest, who wouldnt have hated someone who demanded to be known as "Andrew" and struggled to count to 10.

Him and Gazza doing the dentist chair pre EURO 1996 = LEGENDS

And Im not sure who else I've missed out, Beckham wasn't playing 1996, so unless you mean the Neviller...

did anyone see the England vs ROW this weekend? I turned it on with about 20 minutes to go not knowing what it was, saw a nice move involving Le Saux, Redknapp, Shearer and Sherringham taking Jaap Stam to pieces so decided to leave it on. Few minutes later the 4 of them combined again to set up Craig David who shot narrowly over. It completely freaked me out.

I saw some of it yeah. Ben Shepherd was immense. Dont know why Craig David ended up with MOTM either...blacks voting I guess.

Glenn Hysén wrote:did anyone see the England vs ROW this weekend? I turned it on with about 20 minutes to go not knowing what it was, saw a nice move involving Le Saux, Redknapp, Shearer and Sherringham taking Jaap Stam to pieces so decided to leave it on. Few minutes later the 4 of them combined again to set up Craig David who shot narrowly over. It completely freaked me out.

I thought the same exactly - some of their football was still a delight to watch. Admittedly against poo poo opposition, but Sheringham looks, even now, everything Rooney is trying to be attacking-wise but failing - playing deep, picking perfect weighted passes, creating unselfishly for others. That move which ended up with him cushioning the ball with his head into the path of Craaaaaaaaaig Daaaaaaaaavid was delightful

(talking of Craig David - Prior to the game in his interview he said something along the lines of "The Rest of the World look good, but England have got Craig David so it'll all be ok". Will he ever stop referring to himself in 3rd person?)