Search Amazon.com:
Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«2 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Bias aside I don't think Gerrard or (Lampard) has ever been a bad influence in the England side.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



England will put out a team featuring the likes of Terry, Rio, Gerrard, Lampard, Parker, Barry and Cole and suffer the same results that they always have. Nothing will be fixed, nothing will be learned. Then when the World Cup in Brazil comes along the squad will be packed full of players with not enough experience on top of not being talented enough.

They need to do what Germany did and start from scratch. Take a young hungry team to the Euros and give them freedom to play attacking football.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



They need to follow the blueprint. The German team is better on paper no matter what team England choose to put out so I see very little point in continuing with the same players that have constantly shown they're not good enough (and more importantly aren't going to be good enough) when you can look at the long term and start building for Brazil.

Hart, Jones, Smalling, Richards, Cleverly, Walcott, Wilshere (yes, I'm aware he's injured and not going to the Euros), Welbeck, Sturridge and Adam Johnson all have shown huge potential but it will all be for nothing if they're not given the chance (which a few of them aren't even getting at club level).

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Ninpo posted:

I don't see Walcott getting much better than he is. He's 23 so should be approaching something like the finished product now, he isn't going to get any faster and I doubt he's going to get any trickier. The only possible improvement is gaining consistency but it's 50/50 which Walcott he'll consistently be. So someone else should play instead.

Walcott is a funny one. I actually think he'd thrive in a team like United where quick, direct counter attacking is used rather than patient build up play like Arsenal. With the players England have I think they should be aiming for that as they don't have the necessary players or technique to play a possession based game.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Byolante posted:

If Carrol has finally discovered how to shoot then him, if not and Crouch has a good few games it will be him.

Carroll can shoot fine. He just can't move into positions where he can shoot.

I'm warming to Carroll ever so slowly but I agree on it being a joke if he's selected.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



FullLeatherJacket posted:

To cut a long story short, yes.

In any case, though, and I've talked about this before, people keep demanding apples in response to seeing oranges. Germany didn't take a team of kids. The way people talk about it, they'd have you believe they pulled a bus up to a Hauptschule in Kaiserslautern and yelled, "Schnell! Schnell! Wir fahren nach Disneyland gehen!" before dropping them all off in Jo'burg, which is a traditional German practical joke.

The team Germany took were all in their early 20s and had played hundreds of games of top-flight football before they got on the plane. Mezut Ozil was 21 and had played almost 150 games for Schalke and Werder Bremen prior to South Africa. The fact that you hadn't heard of him was because you didn't give a gently caress about Werder Bremen, not because Jogi Löw found him selling flowers on the side of a motorway.

It's hardly loving difficult to see the distinction between this and taking Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, a kid who visited the Emirates gift shop once.

The problem, as I say, is that people start talking this ridiculous horseshit about "the stench of failure" and demanding change for change's sake. I've pointed out before that it would be equivalent to United fans responding to last year's defeat to Barcelona by demanding that Rooney be dropped and replaced with Will Keane. I mean, Rooney's already proven that HE can't beat Barcelona, so it's not like there's any way it could be worse, right? You know, except for the thing where it's functionally retarded and only people who genuinely follow the England team could treat it seriously.

The English equivalent to the German team that went to South Africa are players like Walcott, Young, Richards, Milner, Downing or Agbonlahor. They're mainly players who were in the U21 setup in 2007 or 2009. But they're also largely proven prospects who are either in the England team or who people have already written off. Or both. Nobody is loving delusional enough to believe that Gabby Agbonlahor is going to win a World Cup. But they are delusional enough to believe that OxCham or Wilshere or Andy Carroll (circa last year) might just be The One They Were Hoping For.

It's an absurdity to be talking seriously about dropping experienced players to replace them with players who, in many cases, aren't even first choice for their clubs. United bias or otherwise, I don't honestly believe there's a single club in football who, if Rio Ferdinand showed up tomorrow wanting to play, would tell him to do one. I don't think Scholes is far off that, either. But, instead of Paul Scholes, it might be a better idea to take Josh McEachran, a player not actually good enough to play for a literal Welsh football team.

These are the same people, the same loving people, who decided that it was absolutely time that David Beckham was dropped for Shaun Wright-Phillips because he was 32 or some poo poo, and well, that just worked out peachy for you, didn't it, Steve? And you all clapped and cheered when Beckham came back because SWP was poo poo, you disingenuous bastards.

And this is all before you point out that England's young players don't seem particularly good competing at their own level, having flailed hilariously out of the Baby Euros last year, and not winning a single game in the process. Of course, to be fair on the kids, you may want to put some of that blame on The Man Who Failed Upwards, one Stuart Pearce. In which case, luckily for you, there's definitely no chance of him ending up managing England this summer when the Redknapp deal goes tits up. None at all.

The problem with this is that those same old experienced players are being used in the same old way with, unsurprisingly, the same end result. Your media, your FA, your supporters are all short term thinkers and that's why England will never win poo poo.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Paperhouse posted:

code:
           Hart
Jones Smalling Ferdinand Cole
      Carrick Scholes
         Cleverley
Welbeck              Young
           Rooney
premier league and euro2012 winners.

Not too bad but Cleverly shouldn't be in there and Richards should play instead of Jones. I'd also have Walcott over Welbeck.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Jesus loving christ. Seriously the English FA have got to be the most short-sighted morons ever. Roy Hodgson is about the most uninspired choice they could have possibly made. He won't make any of the necessary big decisions that need to be made and he'll have them playing the same football that wins nothing and is painful to watch.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Babby Thatcher posted:

as opposed to Harry Redknapp, who had explicitly stated his intention to do exactly what you're moaning about there on several occasions, Alan Pardew, who doesn't want the job, and Stuart Pearce, who is poo poo. who should have got the job?

Redknapp would be a terrible choice for exactly the same reasons.

What England need is a competent young manager who, along with the FA, have a long term vision on how they want the team to play. With Hodgson you're going to get more of the same; a collection of average to good players thrown together and hoping for the best.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



TyChan posted:

What young and up-and-coming manager wants to kill their career momentum (probably permanently) at England, though?

The closest thing you have to that within the FA's reach is Stuart Pearce and that hasn't been going well.

Well yes, I suppose this is the problem. The FA, the media and the fans mean there is almost no chance of any manager being given the necessary time to see a long term plan reach fruition.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



tbp posted:

Should've hired Rafa

With Emery most likely leaving Valencia I wonder if Rafa might be enticed into going back?

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Breath Ray posted:

There aren't any quotes or anything but fearless investigative reporter Daniel Taylor says Hodgson favours a CB pairing of Terry and Ferdinand which seems bizarre to me because say what you like about positioning these two are OLD. Also Darren Bent may be fit in time for the euros but he hasn't done enough this term imo

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/...and?INTCMP=SRCH

Were you honestly expecting any different?

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



The Anti-Semite posted:

Hart, Richards, Lescott, Terry, Cole, Carrick, Parker, Gerrard, Young, Walcott, Welbeck

Done.

This is the line up I'd pick as well.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



The Anti-Semite posted:

Glen Johnson lol.

Also Milner over Theo? Madness.

My only worry w/r/t Hodgson is that he's a sucker for 4-4-2 and that REALLY isn't the way to go unless we are literally going to have two banks of four behind the ball at all times.

If we are going to play 4-4-2, there's no point in Theo even being on the plane.

I'm with you in that I agree Richards should start but Johnson is a good player and certainly a better option than Richards if you're chasing the game.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



I think England should take Carroll. He's been poo poo for as long as he was good so it's hard to gauge his true level but he has come in to a bit of form recently, is still incredibly young for a target man type player and the difference between someone like him and Holt is negligible.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Grant Holt is thirty-one years old. Andy Carroll has just turned twenty-three. The fact is England are in a pretty transitional period right now and have little to no chance of success at Ukraine and Poland. It strikes me as a great opportunity to give experience to the young players England have coming through. Andy Carroll, like him or not, has the potential to be a starter for England in Brazil.

Personally I like Holt and would be delighted for the guy if he was to be selected but it screams of England again resorting to extreme short-sightedness. To be honest the fact that Hodgson was made manager has already convinced me that the FA have absolutely no long term plan what-so-ever and it will no doubt be the same goons who always disappoint being selected again.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



St Evan Echoes posted:

He's also managed to make Downing - who is far from a terrible winger - look like a zero-assist chump by refusing to get on the end of a cross now and again

From someone who has watched almost every Liverpool game this season I can assure you that Carroll has been a better striker than Downing has been a winger.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Loving Africa Chaps posted:

I don't think anyone who isn't a liverpool fan thinks he should. If you have to take either then lampard is superior in every single way unless ability to sing you'll never walk alone counts.

I don't think Gerrard should go at all. He's been injured for huge chunks of the season and is definitely on the decline. I think he's still better than the young players that could replace him but as I said this is a perfect opportunity to play them and give them experience.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Scott Bakula posted:

Nobody who has played for Liverpool this season should go

Glen Johnson has been good this season to be fair. Certainly done nothing to warrant being dropped. He's not old and he's still a much better choice than Walker. I'd have Richards starting but he's a great option to have.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Barry used to play at left back for a while too.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Fat Guy Sexting posted:

Scholes, Lampard, Barry

None of them would make the French side. Or arguably the Italian or Dutch side.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Lol England you are hilarious

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Richards must have done something. It makes no sense to me. You'd also think he'd be fresher than most as he's been on the bench for the last few games. I wonder if Pearce has something to do with it? Odd.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



This is sweet revenge for the entire TRP saying Liverpool should be happy to have Hodgson as manager.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



SharpyShuffle posted:

There probably shouldn't be four liverpool players at the Euros full stop, let alone in the England squad.

Four men from the worst liverpool team in living memory. Hodgson is awesome.

To be fair Johnson has been decent this season and should be in ahead of Walker at least. Still think Richards should start though. Gerrard is still good but he's barely played this season. I understand Carroll's selection as he's come into form and is still young as hell. Downing shouldn't be anywhere near the squad.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Hart
Johnson Cahill Lescott Cole
Gerrard Parker Barry
Walcott Young
Welbeck

This team sucks and won't win poo poo but it's about the best you could hope for.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Psybro posted:

You know, reading about Carroll's "'''"""""late season form"'''""""" so often, I was shocked to find that in his last 7 games his side won 2 games and lost all the others, whilst Carroll himself managed a staggering return of 3 goals, 2 of them against the second worst defence in the league.

In so doing, he doubled his league tally for the season, which I suppose is amazing late season form if you define it quite strictly.

You are aware that target men aren't solely picked for scoring right? I certainly don't think he deserves to be starting for England but his hold up play, work rate and all round play was pretty good at the end of the season. If we had better wingers he would have scored more too.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Carroll is poo poo but there is potential for him to become a decent target man in the future. If he was keeping out really quality talent I could understand the frustration but he's not.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Pasco posted:

Carrick should have been first XI, then none of this would have come up.

Carrick shouldn't have been a little bitch when he didn't get his way.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Scott Bakula posted:

Are there even any good English prospects for defensive midfielder or will we continue to put people there who aren't all that good

I think we are all a little surprised Spearing hasn't been called up.

What happened to Rodwell? I always though he was incredibly overrated but he was always mentioned as being in the mix.

Edit: They should call up Leon Britton. He plays a lot like Carrick and has come off a great season

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



England have one world class player and it's Ashley Cole. He's a stinkyhole but he's the only player who'd make most teams starting eleven.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Kelly is pretty good tbf. I can't ever remember him having a bad game for Liverpool. Considering the way Roy sets his teams up he'd probably be more useful as a starter than Johnson. I'd definitely have him starting there over an out of position centre back

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



stickyfngrdboy posted:


Micah Richards is a much better right back than Johnson. Johnson wouldn't get in the Liverpool side if Richards was there.

Wrong.

Liverpool were fine at the back this year and Johnson was good, when fit. We struggle to break teams down so having a defender like Richards who doesn't offer nearly as much on attack would do nothing for us. Johnson has had mulitple games where he has been our biggest threat- something that may say more of the rest of our team but it's certainly not a role that Richards is capable of fulfilling.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



stickyfngrdboy posted:

You're a Liverpool fan, and you would rather have Johnson in your team than Richards? heh.

Richards wouldn't make the side ahead of Johnson because Johnson plays well for Liverpool and gives us another attacking outlet which we're desperate to have. If you honestly think Richards is a better attacking fullback than Johnson I just don't know what to say

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Psybro posted:

Micah Richards happens to play for a side that have various attacking outlets. He's still better.

This is like saying Andy Carroll is better than Welbeck because Carroll looked most like scoring in games where nobody scored, as opposed to just scoring in games where multiple players scored like Welbeck.

Well I suppose you're far more likely to know what you're talking about than Capello and Hodgson.

Richards is good and the fact that he's not in the squad is really baffling but Johnson is a good fullback and given the fact that Hodgson looks to favour Milner at right mid makes it all the more important to have a fullback that is comfortable overlapping and cuttung inside- which is Johnson's specialty.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Psybro posted:

The 606 forums are crying out for this kind of cutting edge commentary.

Yeah it's a ridiculous thing to say tbf but there is surely a reason that Richards isn't favoured and given the amount of hosed up poo poo the rest of team have done I think it's mainly a footballing reason.

I do actually rate Richards quite highly and think he'd probably be a better option against France where he's be a better option to go up against Ribery than Johnson. But against weeker sides I think Johnson just offers more offensively.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



DickEmery posted:

Johnson's had a good season where he's not hosed things up as much as usual but Richards is a much better right back and 4 years younger.
There's no way Johnson would start ahead of him for footballing reasons.

I think Johnson has been good for us the entire time he's been at Liverpool tbh. I think his reputation of being suspect at the back is based on when he plays for England (which is never going to have the same defensive organization as a decent club side) as opposed to Liverpool. He's also been tarnished by the ridiculous fee we paid for him (which wasn't nearly as bad as it was made out to be due to Portsmouth owing us a tonne of cash for Crouch which we were unlikely to get back).

Richards is good though and if England did actually have a long term plan then I would completely understand him starting ahead of Johnson but seeing as there doesn't (ever) seem to be one I get why Johnson gets the nod.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



Ninpo posted:

People talking like Micah Richards doesn't attack and that he wasn't, for long periods this season, the only width City had on the right...what the gently caress is going on in this thread?

It's mainly me tbf and perhaps I've not seen the games where Richards was amazing going forwards. I've always been impressed with Johnson's ability to run off the ball and be happy both cutting in and shooting or taking it to the byline to put a cross in. As sad as it is very few English fullbacks seem capable of that.

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



sassassin posted:

Quick, do Liverpool have any more English strikers they can send?

Jay Spearing could do a job

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Ewar Woowar
Feb 25, 2007



nictigre03 posted:

Haha no. But I wouldn't mind him over Glenn "Own Goal" Johnson.

Johnson has been good though

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«2 »