your most important players for the next world cup?

Barrilete_Cosmico wrote:1) Mascherano, most important player we've got in our team and our squad
2)and3)...don't matter since everyone's been playing so badly

Where is Maradona II

Surely "the worlds greatest" player is indispensible for Argentina.

1 - Kaká
2 - Luís Fabulous
3 - Júlio César

or

1 - Gilberto Silva
2 - Elano
3 - Felipe Melo or André Santos

Pierre I don't think you've been following Ballack's career over recent years... your points all are/used to be valid but he's evolved into far more of a defensive midielder and is very decent there even if it takes away some of his attacking threat/shooting and heading from open play. (As I've said before, there was a reason Hiddink often switched him to most defensive mid of the three behind Essien and Lampard, and it had depressingly successful results in e.g. the FA cup semi against Arsenal earlier this year.) The sacrifice was one well worth making in the World Cup and him as AM only really paid off against Portugal in the Euro – it's an option, definitely, but sometimes it works, sometimes not.

Besides, he won't be playing as CM but as one of the more defensive midfielders in a 4-2-3-1, and will be indispensable. The thought of Hitzlsperger on current form in there doesn't bear thinking about against stronger nations. Özil (he won't choke like Gomez Otto, don't be silly) simply HAS to play as #10 with two from Podolski, Schweinsteiger and Trochowski wide and Klose up front.

Probably agree with Özil on the three, might consider Adler or Lahm (or even Poldi, given the consistency of his international performances) instead of Merte as the third. Frings won't play, though if things continue he should be in there ahead of Hitz, but not ahead of Khedira.

I have followed his career and I've seen it plummet.

We'll have to agree to disagree 'cos for me if a player is 6ft 3, two-footed, a great finisher, one of the finest headers of a ball you'll ever see, is able to arrive in the box to score vital goals (Man Utd, USA, S.Korea, Man Utd) but is only average at passing and tackling then I know where I'd play him.

For the Dutch

VDS
Boulahrouz

Ricardo Wetzel wrote:For the Dutch

VDS
Boulahrouz

Really like him - should have had a better career.

Pierre Littbarski wrote:I have followed his career and I've seen it plummet.

We'll have to agree to disagree 'cos for me if a player is 6ft 3, two-footed, a great finisher, one of the finest headers of a ball you'll ever see, is able to arrive in the box to score vital goals (Man Utd, USA, S.Korea, Man Utd) but is only average at passing and tackling then I know where I'd play him.

Agree to disagree is fair enough. But what did you make of his showing at the last World Cup, when he scored no goals but performed a crucial role for the team? As compared to the last Euro, where he scored a couple and was playing as AM in the knockouts, but only truly impressed there against Portugal.

He can still offer that threat, particularly from set pieces, and one way or another has more or less kept up his scoring record for the national team (42 in 97 is just ridiculous for a midfielder).

I can see the case for playing him in AM, but there is a downside too, as it's not particularly creative. Mesut is a true playmaker, which Ballack has never been. To lose that threat because of some misplaced dogmatic obsession of where Ballack is best used would be lunacy. And believe me, we don't want Hitzlsperger over Ballack as DM...

Allez les rouges wrote:
Agree to disagree is fair enough. But what did you make of his showing at the last World Cup, when he scored no goals but performed a crucial role for the team?

So-so.

He was playing Costa Rica, Poland, Ecuador and Sweden which is the problem with rating players on WC performances - its fun to watch but the standard is very poor compared with CL, EPL, La Liga, Serie A - that's why players who are signed on the back of WC performances tend to flop.


The only quality Germany played was Argentina (who's manager committed tactical suicide) and Italy - Ballack was non-existent v Italy and all thsi with home advantage.

Pierre Littbarski wrote:If Germany played Ballack in between midfield and attack they would be a contender - with him in midfield they will come unstuck against footballing opposition.


1. Rooney

2. Glen Johnson

3. Would put someone skillful but I've already picked the only 2 from our starting XI

Being skillful doesn't obviously translate to 'most important'.

Do you not consider Joe Cole skillful then?

Tweesus wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:If Germany played Ballack in between midfield and attack they would be a contender - with him in midfield they will come unstuck against footballing opposition.


1. Rooney

2. Glen Johnson

3. Would put someone skillful but I've already picked the only 2 from our starting XI

Being skillful doesn't obviously translate to 'most important'.

Do you not consider Joe Cole skillful then?

It does when a team is so lacking in skill as England.

Joe Cole probably won't play.

What about Lennon?

borocooper wrote:What about Lennon?

He's a winger - I don't want him playing.

They can be entertaining but are generally inconsistent by nature.

Everyone seems to be moving towards having 4 midfielders in the middle and overlapping fullbacks - Chelsea, Inter, Brazil, Spain etc, that's the modern game.

Let the Dutch have their wingers.

Pierre Littbarski wrote:

borocooper wrote:What about Lennon?

He's a winger - I don't want him playing.

They can be entertaining but are generally inconsistent by nature.

Everyone seems to be moving towards having 4 midfielders in the middle and overlapping fullbacks - Chelsea, Inter, Brazil, Spain etc, that's the modern game.

Let the Dutch have their wingers.

You should tell Capello where he's been going wrong all these years.

Kimbo wrote:

Pierre Littbarski wrote:

borocooper wrote:What about Lennon?

He's a winger - I don't want him playing.

They can be entertaining but are generally inconsistent by nature.

Everyone seems to be moving towards having 4 midfielders in the middle and overlapping fullbacks - Chelsea, Inter, Brazil, Spain etc, that's the modern game.

Let the Dutch have their wingers.

You should tell Capello where he's been going wrong all these years.

True - he's been shit in the The Champions League for the last 15 years.

Capello is famous for his use of wingers too isn't he ?

Whether he's famous for it is irrelevant, he uses them.

Only for England, and thats probably more out of necessity - Lets face it, England dont have Cafu on their team.

Cafu---Samuel---Aldair---Candela
---Tommasi---Emerson---Lima---

Was he not a 442 man at Real Madrid aswell?

I dont know, I remember Beckham getting a run at the latter end of the season. Wasn't Capello there for only one season? Not like he could mould his preferred tactics immediately.

Kimbo wrote:Was he not a 442 man at Real Madrid aswell?

But now you are talking formations and not players. 4-4-2 doesn't mean you have to use wingers nor does any other formation. Even the 4-3-3 doesn't need wingers as Barcelona has showed.

To answer your question Capello used Beckham/Cassano/Reyes/Robinho/Guti and I think Raul aswell at one point. Of those players only Reyes can be described as a winger and Beckham is a wide player. However Beckham was big factor when he got a chance towards the end. If you have a good winger then he can surely contribute but Pierre's point is also valid for club football however since this is international football and that tends to be a bit behind the trends of club football(allthough WC06 suggest it has caught up with Cl).

Who does England use on the wing? Gerrard and

Lennon.

Tweesus wrote:Lennon.

Do you think Joe Cole would get in if he keeps his fitness?

I don't understand why you have to have a winger. You would think England learned the lesson from their 1966 WC win. I think I have underrated the power of tradition in England when people want Owen in the squad. I think they have a great chance with Joe Cole as a starter then with Lennon allthough Lennon could be a nice sub as he showed in 06.

Super Higuain wrote:

Tweesus wrote:Lennon.

Do you think Joe Cole would get in if he keeps his fitness?

I don't understand why you have to have a winger. You would think England learned the lesson from their 1966 WC win. I think I have underrated the power of tradition in England when people want Owen in the squad. I think they have a great chance with Joe Cole as a starter then with Lennon allthough Lennon could be a nice sub as he showed in 06.

Owen is Englands current top goalscorer, with a prolific rate... and a hattrick to boot last night.

Lennon has played more games this season than Cole has in the last two.

Irrelevant comparison anyway, Cole is considered for the England team to be a left winger / midfielder / support forward, Lennon on the other hand lends his strength to the right wing.

Festive Genius wrote:

Super Higuain wrote:

Tweesus wrote:Lennon.

Do you think Joe Cole would get in if he keeps his fitness?

I don't understand why you have to have a winger. You would think England learned the lesson from their 1966 WC win. I think I have underrated the power of tradition in England when people want Owen in the squad. I think they have a great chance with Joe Cole as a starter then with Lennon allthough Lennon could be a nice sub as he showed in 06.

Owen is Englands current top goalscorer, with a prolific rate... and a hattrick to boot last night.

Lennon has played more games this season than Cole has in the last two.

Irrelevant comparison anyway, Cole is considered for the England team to be a left winger / midfielder / support forward, Lennon on the other hand lends his strength to the right wing.

How has he played in the last year or so? I'll tell you, fucking terrible, and one game doesn't erase that.

Thank you Krimbo for your input.

Neither does 1 year of poor football erase 10 years of quality. In token, hes never been much more than a goalscorer, and that he has consistently delivered at any club at an exceptional rate.

We're talking about a player who can be used in a squad next year at the world cup, who has a better record than ANY other player in the squad with regards to scoring at World Cups.

The issue is fitness, so long as he isn't injured, why can't he come on for 20minutes to grab a goal? why can't he play the final game(s) in the group stage once we've qualified and allow the likes of Rooney to rest?

Because he dicked over your shite excuse of a club?... well fucking HELLO... he dicked Liverpool over long before, and we told you what a bag of a wanker you were getting... but you were all 'goals goals goals'

You know what? he's STILL scoring goals.. a fucking hattrick last night for christs sake.

Put your bitter shite to one side, and see the opportunity the country could use next summer eh?

FG - we've all seen how German teams defend in the CL over recent years.

Its not just Owen that has changed - its the game.

No one plays 2 out and out strikers now and therefore he is finished.

Michael Owen : for all your useless goals

Pierre Littbarski wrote:FG - we've all seen how German teams defend in the CL over recent years.

Its not just Owen that has changed - its the game.

No one plays 2 out and out strikers now and therefore he is finished.

I really don't need to do more than highlight that statement.

What a complete load of shite, our own frigging national team plays with two strikers... what more compatibility do you want?

Chelsea, Arsenal, United all in the EPL play with two strikers... theres 3 of your top 4.

What about countries i hear you ask? well... where do i start... fuck me i'm not even going to bother do your own research its so overwelming.

Festive Genius wrote:Thank you Krimbo for your input.

Neither does 1 year of poor football erase 10 years of quality. In token, hes never been much more than a goalscorer, and that he has consistently delivered at any club at an exceptional rate.

We're talking about a player who can be used in a squad next year at the world cup, who has a better record than ANY other player in the squad with regards to scoring at World Cups.

The issue is fitness, so long as he isn't injured, why can't he come on for 20minutes to grab a goal? why can't he play the final game(s) in the group stage once we've qualified and allow the likes of Rooney to rest?

Because he dicked over your shite excuse of a club?... well fucking HELLO... he dicked Liverpool over long before, and we told you what a bag of a wanker you were getting... but you were all 'goals goals goals'

You know what? he's STILL scoring goals.. a fucking hattrick last night for christs sake.

Put your bitter shite to one side, and see the opportunity the country could use next summer eh?

You don't actually believe he's had 10 years of quality do you? The Owen you saw at Pool hasn't been seen at ANY of his subsequent clubs.

Why can't he come on in the last 20 minutes and score a goal? Because his finishing is average these days perhaps? This myth about him still being a good goalscorer is exactly that, a myth.

Michael Owen:

Games played Goals scored;

438 211

His international record i hear you scream?! what is it? 40 in 89?

How old is he i hear you cry? 29...

But hes not fit!!!... quite the contrary, fit and playing all season this year!

----------------------

Well ou claim he isn't a goalscorer infact the words you use is 'myth'

Funny how his actual record completely contradicts you... he doesn't bag every opportunity (who on fucking earth does?) but at the highest level to have a record of 1 in 2 is a fairly large fucking accomplishment? and to stick that fairly large fucking accomplishment on the bench as a player who COULD grab a goal is a whole load more likely than shoving Heskey, Carlton Cole, Agbonlawhore, Bent yadeyadeya... at international level, wouldn't you agree? well no of course not but don't let those 40 goals in 89 international games cloud your opinion.

Fucking idiot.

O when will he selected for the first time by Capello?