EMNT Thread: JT is SOL - The Something Awful Forums

«‹›4 »

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium* > The Ray Parlour > EMNT Thread: JT is SOL

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Scale of 1-10, how unbearable is this all going to be? The way people think about sport is an absolute joke.

# ¿ Feb 9, 2012 02:41

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 26, 2013 04:26

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

I don't get why "Lampard and Gerrard can't play together" (always a bit of a lazy opinion in my book) equals "drop Lampard and Gerrard". You only need to not play one of them. Drop Lampard. Keep Gerrard. He's still definitely good enough. He really, really is. He's not slow, he's not out of shape, he's not lost it. He is a slightly different player that he was a few years ago but he still does it on the pitch.

It always comes across as people thinking any player that hits 30 becomes too old automatically, rather than actually looking at how they play and deciding that they are no longer good enough. It's being bored and fed up with the Golden Generation and wanting some new faces, it's not actual appraisal of their current 2012 abilities and usefulness to the England team. If it's Cleverley that finally pushes him out of the England centre midfield then so be it, but there's not enough better midfielders yet that he shouldn't be playing.

With the options of Parker and Barry as well, it's not even like he has to be relied on to hold the midfield (which he can do when required, obviously not as well as a DM though).

# ¿ Feb 9, 2012 19:51

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Thinking now, there's too much focus on "old generation" versus "new generation", and that skips over players like Lescott, Milner or Jagielka. I'm looking at it as needing a transition rather than a complete overhaul. If you focus on the individual elements then the problems and solutions vary:

Forwards/Wingers: No longer have to rely on Heskey or Wright-Phillips, thank God. After Beny and Rooney, Welbeck and Sturridge are probably ready for regular interational duty, back-ups include Carroll, Agbonlahor and maybe Defoe. Lennon's better than he was in 2010, so is Milner, so is Young. Dont' see a big problem in attack, these players are better than the options from the WC.

GK: Hart's nailed-on for the long-term, think we're all agreed there. Back-ups can be whoever, Stockdale I guess.

MF: Here's where the biggest debate is, I think. Big jump between the old and new, so it's either keep the 30+ year olds or replace then with 20-year olds. Wilshere is the only "new kid" that's good enough yet, so it's still Gerrard-Barry-Parker-Lampard for another year or so.

DF: Doesn't need a shift to new generation, needs a shift to mid-generation. God only knows why Upson played in the WC. Transition from Terry-Rio-Cole to Lescott, Baines, Jagielka, Glen Johnson, maybe Dawson. Throwing Smalling, Richards and Jones in as the new starters would be crazy I think. I don't think things get magically so much better in defence, but it stops the decline.

I think the pool of English players is noteably better than it was then, blaming it all on Capello's squad selection is pretty harsh. The WC just fell at an unfortunate time when the old players were declining but the new ones hadn't reached the level to replace them yet. It's been two years, we're more on the cusp of that now I think.

[edit]are people for non-national managers around here then? I think the physios, the coaches, even the kitman should be English. It's one country competing against another in a sports game, and the people involved go a lot further than the players on the pitch. Should be representing their own country irregardless of whether being from there helps the team or not.

Hoops fucked around with this message at Feb 10, 2012 around 00:25

# ¿ Feb 10, 2012 00:21

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Barry Glendenning made a good point, how useful is Harry's bonhomie and team spirit if he hasn't got his backroom staff with him filling in the holes and actually training the team to play well together?

# ¿ Feb 10, 2012 02:13

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Take Scholes, leave him on the bench until it's clear that centre 2 or 3 aren't winning the midfield. Take off whoever is the least attacking or defending midfielder (say if it's Parker, Barry, Gerrard, take off Barry) and see if he can overturn the midfield advantage. Seems quite easy to me.

Scholes is an absolutely true CM except for the fact he can't tackle. Keep someone else in there to defend, let Gerrard or Milner or Lampard move forward, Scholes can spray the passes around in the second half. Age is just a number in the end, there's no too young or too old, only "good enough".

# ¿ Feb 15, 2012 03:49

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Tatty Muncher posted:

Applies as much to players as managers imho

Yeah, but I think it's a little confused at what it's actually trying to point out. Is experience of different footballing cultures the good thing, or the fact that other leagues can have so many domestic managers a good thing?

I think it's trying to claim that loads of Europeans have no problem going to a different country, when that isn't true. It's really only a handful, and they mostly come here. It's not like Germany, Spain, Italy and France are all trading managers back and forth. Ancelotti hadn't left Italy until he came to Chelsea, neither had Mancini. It names some managers and then says "the list could go on", despite pointing out in the previous paragraph that other leagues are mostly domestic managers. The list couldn't go on, not any more than a few other names we've ever heard of. There are a few "international" managers like Hiddink, Mourinho, Hodgson, but across the 100 or so teams of the top 5 leagues they are not the norm at all. Admittedly of the few, it is only McLaren who is English, but then how many French or German managers are at clubs abroad?

And then it goes on about 3 English managers, but sweeps the other 11 "home nations" (hate that term) managers under the rug, as though there's any difference between an English manager, and say, Hughes or Dalglish. Even Wenger has been here for coming on 20 years now. They all play this "one-dimensional English football" (should be "British football" really), so in my book they're all domestic managers.

I know the main point is about the national team not the domestic leagues, that there needs to be better England managerial candidates and the way to improve your CV is to go abroad. So they want an English guy who can play rounded, European football, basically. But we've just had a guy who is one of the best in the world at European football and nobody was happy with him. Why would a man with the same background as Capello, who just happens to be English, make the team actually play any better? (to be fair, the article agrees Capello wasn't a failure).

The more I think about it though the more that article seems to suffer from viewing other European countries as one big "Foreign", where they do things so much better and which consists solely of Barca, Madrid, Inter, Bayern and the Spanish and German national teams. No country has a manager who is a national, has won loads of trophies, has experience in a variety of other leagues and has experience with international teams. Hiddink is like the only guy in the world who ticks all those boxes.

I might be being too critical of the whole thing, but if Alex Ferguson had been born 100 miles further south that article wouldn't have been written.

Hoops fucked around with this message at Feb 15, 2012 around 11:34

# ¿ Feb 15, 2012 11:29

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Jose posted:

Its less about experiencing football cultures, and more about managing at the top level. Redknapp is doing it now, Pardew if Newcastle goes well will likely get the chance to manage at a bigger club in England. Top English clubs want a proven manager and the way to get that is go abroad in most cases.

Still don't agree with that though. It depends how many you want at the "top level" (basically the CL). 32 teams made it to the group stages of the CL, from what? 12 countries? How many managers should be English? I think only 2 were Spanish, Leonardo was at Inter so maybe 3 Italians?

It's such a tiny pool of "top level jobs" to be shared between so many nationalities, that the fact that Ferguson and Wenger aren't English completely throw off the expected numbers for England. I don't see it as some endemic problem (alteast not one other countries don't have), I see it as the fact that two very successful clubs happened to have the same managers for ages, both of whom aren't English. If they were both English and had been doing what they're doing for this long, there's no problem. Okay they're not, but it's not because of failings in the English managerial system.

Articles like this always confuse "the world's elite managers" with "all foreign managers", and have two classes of people: "English" and "not English" and think comparing them in size is any use. I'm all for suggestions of how the situation can improve, because hey why not? but I don't think England is somehow massively underperforming in managers right now. Say Harry stays, Newcastle get fourth and Twente make the group stages (all very possible situations). All of a sudden ta-dah! there's 3 English managers in the Champions League and we're punching above the average again. Now there's some Swiss journalist writing the same article over there about how "there's only non-Swiss foreigners in the top level jobs".

quote:

The reason the other home nations managers are swept under the rug is because, as the article states, it'll never happen

I was more going on about how they think it's weird that 15% of coaches are English (which was ignoring McCarthy anyway, come on that guy is way more English that Irish). I see it that 75% are British (not some political point, just there's no difference in footballing culture between Welsh/Scottish/English/Northern Irish managers). He's got a point in the context of the national manager but I was just commenting on the stat really, it paints a pretty misleading picture.

Hoops fucked around with this message at Feb 15, 2012 around 13:11

# ¿ Feb 15, 2012 12:12

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Holy poo poo Scholes made his international retirement in August 2004. By the time the Euros come round, that will be nearly 8 years ago. I still say take him, but jesus that is a long time.

# ¿ Feb 15, 2012 13:49

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Tatty Muncher posted:

75% British is irrelevant though because this is about an English manager for the England job. In football terms the home nations are Sovereign countries (ignoring the Welsh team anomalies). Scandinavian countries play a fairly similar style of football to us, should we include them in the stats too?

Yeah, he's got a point in the context of the national manager but I was just commenting on the stat really, it paints a pretty misleading picture.

# ¿ Feb 16, 2012 01:19

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Loving Africa Chaps posted:

heres my england team for the future

code:

                   hart

richards    smallling   jones   someone

          frimpong    parker

                  wilshere

     oxalaide-chamb       sturridge
                       
                 welbeck

I quite like this team (although yeah Baines on the left), but "the future" needs to be defined a bit more. By the time Ox-Chamb is starting for England, Parker won't be. Probably the same with Cleverley. Also Rooney is still going to be the best striker when he's 29.

I also think that team lacks a bit of, I don't know, "star quality" maybe? That's been the problem I guess, picking the golden generation big names, but when you look at some of the young players other teams have got, there's no player for England that excites me that much. To be fair, the Euros are a few of these guys' first chance to make an impact, but I don't see anyone coming back from them with a significantly higher profile. Maybe Welbeck.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2012 11:26

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Parity warning posted:

Agreed with this and imo Britain should recruit Cristiano Ronaldo and they would win a blue ribbon in the European tournament. Steven Gerald will swerve free kicks between the uprights. A winning team

Yes yes yes, thank you all for this kind of response

I want England to do as well as possible, I'm just saying it's nice sometimes to have some real character and personality in your team to get passionate about, like a Balotelli or a Gyan, even a Beckham. Sorry if it makes me a massive plastic but I like international football to be as fun as possible, and that team is a little dry. Rooney is the only one that really fits the bill right now for England and he's not there.

Am I basically saying I want footballers to be celebrities? Sometimes, yeah.

# ¿ Feb 26, 2012 03:49

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

St Evan Echoes posted:

you just have to accept that holt lacks a bit of, I don't know, "star quality" maybe?

Carroll has it actually, that's a good point. Hope he ends up on the pitch.

# ¿ Feb 27, 2012 15:12

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

The GB team may end up being more impressive than the England squad that plays Holland. I'd certainly rather have a Beckham cross than a Downing one right now.

[edit]Bale, Ramsay, The Ox, Sinclair, say Beckham, Fletcher, Miller as the over-agers. Yeah, I'd say it probably was.

Hoops fucked around with this message at Feb 28, 2012 around 20:40

# ¿ Feb 28, 2012 20:35

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Scikar posted:

We're still looking to the likes of Walcott, Bent and Johnson to make a significant contribution where others have Pedro, Benzema or Lahm. We rely on Rooney almost as much as Portugal rely on Ronaldo, we have 1 goalkeeper worth his salt

I don't think any of this is very fair. If you cherry pick players from every other country, then yes our players look weak in comparison, but that's only because England doesn't have one of the best in their world at their position, in every position on the field. It's really only Spain and possibly Holland that are close to that. An Italian or whatever poster could just as easily say "others have Rooney and Ashley Cole".

I don't see them being that reliant on Rooney either. England are a bit, but nowhere near the levels of Ronaldo/Nani, Ibrahimovic, or some countries outside Europe like Ghana or South Korea. The majority of England internationals are starters for top-half teams in one of the top 3 competitive leagues in the world.

And one excellent goalkeeper is better than the majority of European countries have.

# ¿ Feb 28, 2012 20:56

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

dilbertschalter posted:

I wouldn't say the Netherlands are that close that, just look at their back four. The only country were you can't do that is Brazil (maybe Spain).

I was looking up the recent Brazil squad and read this, which I thought was a fun story:

quote:

The use of blue as the away kit colour dates from the 30s, but it became the permanent second choice accidentally in the 1958 World Cup Final. Brazil's opponents were Sweden, who also wear yellow, and a draw gave the home team, Sweden, the right to play in yellow. Brazil, who travelled with no spare kit, hurriedly purchased a set of blue shirts and sewed on emblems cut from their yellow shirts.

Old time football was so much fun.

But do Brazil really have that impressive a midfield anymore? Compared to Germany's or Spain's? I haven't seen a Brazil game since the group stages of the WC, I don't actually know who starts anymore.

# ¿ Feb 28, 2012 22:01

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Scikar posted:

The same Italy that have Cassano and Criscito? That's my point - you could say Italy are a bit weak at left back because Criscito and Balzaretti aren't amazing. But Criscito is way closer to Ashley Cole than Walcott is to Pedro. Looking down on Portugal in particular is seriously shortsighted - they're only really weak at right back, holding midfield and striker - 3 positions, just like I picked out for England. We really need to stop considering ourselves above Portugal and it's not because our centre backs can't pass.

It was you that was looking down on Portugal though? That's what I was responding to. Either they're only weak at 3 positions or they're overly reliant on Ronaldo, you've just completely flipped your position.

Pedro is one player, for one team. "Others" don't have Pedro, Benzema and Lahm. Spain have Pedro. France has Benzema. Germany have Lahm. No-one else has any of those three players, you're cherry-picking great players from several teams and holding them up against England (who have Rooney and Hart and Cole as world class in their position). We have players that aren't world class. So does every team (apart from maybe Spain as we've been discussing). Honestly, I don't know what you're trying to say here.

Hoops fucked around with this message at Feb 28, 2012 around 22:48

# ¿ Feb 28, 2012 22:45

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Jose posted:

Assuming this would get played, would anyone really take issue with?
code:
               Rooney

Johnson        Milner          Sturridge

          Barry      Parker

Cole      Lescott    Terry     Richards

                 Hart
We all know Terry is starting

Maybe I'd put Young on the left, and Gerrard instead of Milner. But I do like Milner.

Overall I would be perfectly happy with this team.

# ¿ Feb 28, 2012 22:50

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Jose posted:

Then who instead of Johnson? I've watched Johnson in matches and have no real issue with him. Maybe he is better as an impact sub though but we have gently caress all good left wingers

Joe Cole will add that certain touch of continental technique to the mindless brutal power of the English game.

# ¿ Feb 28, 2012 23:03

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Jose posted:

He does have that star quality after all

I notice he hasn't played for England since he signed for Liverpool. And people try and deny the conspiracy???

# ¿ Feb 28, 2012 23:06

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Scikar posted:

Fair enough, we're generally on the same page but I think I was arguing a larger collection of points from a bit further back. I've always been a strong advocate of England accepting their place in world football, but as it happens I do rate the England squad higher than the Portugal one and think that England are in nearly all cases good enough to expect to get out of an international group stage. Taken for granted no, but an underperformance if they don't.

# ¿ Feb 28, 2012 23:16

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

I'm cool with Parker. International captain doesn't do anthing but call the toss in my book, but if it's going to be anyone I suppose a midfielder is the best shout.

# ¿ Feb 29, 2012 15:03

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

I love Gerrard but never in a million years can I see him giving an eloquent, heartfelt captain's speech.

"yeh, you know.....we should all just.....go out there and try hard and that.....you know.....give it our best and that......."

*looks down at the floor*

# ¿ Feb 29, 2012 15:30

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

The only problem is tomorrow morning they'll find the klan hood in his basement.

[edit]actually in seriousness we probably will see some dirt on him now because the sports media are so disgusting. "Parker cheated on highschool sweetheart when he was a 21-year-old earning thousands of pounds a week", "ENGLAND CAPTAIN'S JUNKIE COUSIN SHAME", something like that.

# ¿ Feb 29, 2012 15:43

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

I don't know why managers bother playing Gerrard as CM, he's obviously a CAM. All his best performances have been when he's gets forward, because he can absolutely hammer a goal in from 30 yards (or lets be honest blast it metres over the bar). Everone recognises that Sneijder/Ozil/Van Der Vaart/Dempsey don't play CM so there's no need to force Gerrard to do it, he's nothing like a Modric or a Xavi. If that means he loses out to Wilshere/Cleverley/Scholes/maybe someone like Rodwell, then so be it, because they're better in that position than he is. Use him for what he's good at or don't use him at all.

# ¿ Mar 1, 2012 15:18

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Eric Cantona posted:

Is this a paste from somewhere because he wasn't played as a CM last night and he was gash.

I was speaking generally on the topic as it's been coming up with pundits for years. Truth be told I only saw a bit of the game last night, I was working. Walked into the room to see Robben canter through from his own half as though there were literally no other footballers on the pitch.

# ¿ Mar 1, 2012 15:55

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Blue Screen Error posted:

Is there a GB football team at the paralympics?

I think there's a blind football team?

# ¿ Mar 26, 2012 10:32

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Fat Guy Sexting posted:

One partially sighted and one blind team. The blind captain has one of the best scoring records in football.

They all wear blindfolds in blind football don't they to account for partially sighted players. Do they really bother with two seperate teams?

# ¿ Mar 26, 2012 10:42

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Pasco posted:

The difference is:

Paul Scholes is the finest English footballer of his generation, criminally overlooked by successive England managers and about to lead Man Utd to their 20th league title.

Frank Lampard is a fat mess that scores flukey deflected goals and is otherwise ineffectual.

Scholes retired from international duty about 8 years ago, and Lampard has scored 20 goals a season from midfield for most of his career.

# ¿ Apr 17, 2012 20:37

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

TwoDogs1Cup posted:

Terry is England's best defender by a large margin.

Ledley King would be if his knees weren't a mess.

# ¿ Apr 19, 2012 00:29

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

FullLeatherJacket posted:

I really have no idea what league people are watching when they decide that Ferdinand is past it.

People just assume he is, because That's What Happens when you get past 31 or whatever. Most conversations about football are like that, people following what they expect the story to be rather than what's actually happening. Unless you're a journalist, no-one watches other teams enough to actually comment correctly on how they're playing or what their form is like. Even journalists don't actually.

So shorthand assumptions come into play. (Stoke always park the bus, Carragher will do it in the big games, United's midfield is poo poo, Ferdinand is past it, Gerrard is past it, the entire Chelsea squad are past it, etc).

Most fans' views of other teams is very one-dimensional and pulled together from a small number of factoids. I'm not saying anyone is to blame, or that I'm any better, or even that they're wrong on the whole. But it's all over every discussion of football.

The one that's took over in a big way the last week or so is that Ashley Young Dives. Have a discussion with someone about Man Utd for long enough and wait for them to point out how Young dives all the time as though they've spotted it all by themselves. There's a ton for Liverpool that I notice, but that's because I watch most Liverpool games and non-Liverpool fans don't. Insert your own team here.

Hoops fucked around with this message at Apr 19, 2012 around 19:25

# ¿ Apr 19, 2012 19:22

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Byolante posted:

Rio is in no way past it at all. He is still better than nearly every CB in England. What he isn't is young and thats why I want to ship him out now and bring in some younger dudes.

I don't understand this at all. The euros are in less than three months, with I think two friendlies left. It's "best eleven" time, not "bed in the youngsters for the future" time. It's not an off-year or some early qualifiers where you can plan for the future, England have a present to deal with first. After the euros obviously it's different, but why would you not want a player you think is one of the best CB to be playing?

# ¿ Apr 19, 2012 21:22

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Fat Guy Sexting posted:

There's 20 England games between the Euros and the WC to bring youngsters up to speed. You should never go to a tournament with anything less than your best chance at winning. Remember, my point isn't "Rio should go", it's "if you think he's the best, he should be going to the tournament".

Of course they're not going to win, but if you're not going to give it your best shot don't bother going at all. If you think the best shot is the younger fitter players who may be able to endure a full tournament, that's fine, it's very possible that's true. When I say "best 11", I mean "11 most likely to progress in the tournament".

But about bedding in players for the future: everything you're saying makes perfect sense for friendlies and early WC qualifiers, but a tournament setting is not the place for an aim that is anything other than trying to win. I can't see how that's anything other than "If you're not going to win, don't try".

International football changes everyone's opinions for some reason. Say you're Alan Pardew and you've just got Newcastle into the Champions League. Of course you're not going to win, you're going to get nowhere. So do you give your youth players a run out against Dortmund to get them some experience just because your opponents are better than you and you've no chance? Of course not, you try your hardest anyway.

Hoops fucked around with this message at Apr 19, 2012 around 23:11

# ¿ Apr 19, 2012 23:08

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Fat Guy Sexting posted:

Here we disagree, tournaments come around every 2 years. Making each one the last hurrah for a specific generation of players doesn't do any good. The team that lost in 2010 + token player isn't going to magically come good.

It's not about a last hurrah though, there's no sentimentality to it at all. I just don't see the logic in sacrificing even a marginally better showing in a present tournament for a future tournament, especially when it's two years away with plenty of other matches in between. If you happen to think the younger players will do better than the older ones, definitely take them. But if not, don't.

The first two bits you quoted are basically the same point, I don't know what you're agreeing with in the first and disagreeing with in the second.

edit:

Byolante posted:

Hoops you seem to want the same people who went to shite in South Africa to go again and poo poo it up again

I'm offering no opinion on who should actually go. If you think they'll be shite again, don't take them. But someone said Rio was the best defender, but would rather it wasn't him that was there. I don't get that. Forget the names and the ages and the status. I think it's other people that are not being objective here, not me.

Hoops fucked around with this message at Apr 20, 2012 around 00:01

# ¿ Apr 19, 2012 23:55

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Fat Guy Sexting posted:

That the best team on paper and the best team for a tournament are two separate things really. Though I've kind of confused my point a bit I think. Essentially; older players have their place to play in the squad, but they should be assuming roles like Beckham, playing occasionally but not first XI and reliable when called upon. Lampard is brilliant, Scholes is exceptional. In an ideal world though, neither of them should be starting. They can have the 30 minute cameos at the end of a match and England can move to playing with the Wilshires/Oxlaide Chamberlains/Smalling/Walkers etc.

Not if the Wilshires/Oxlaide Chamberlains/Smalling/Walkers etc. aren't going to do as well. (Again, I'm not arguing that they won't). England should do it's "moving on period" in friendlies and less important matches, the thing they've been preparing for is on their door stop now. I don't see why people want to use the Euros as a training camp for some other future tournament, other than being bored of certain players.

I 100% agree with you everything you're saying, after the honest-to-god tournament is over.

# ¿ Apr 20, 2012 00:06

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Fat Guy Sexting posted:

I think at this point, the current England crop have had 4 tournaments or qualifiers to make their mark. What harm does it do to avoid a decent group and eventual quarter final defeat and try the new ones out. Even if they lose, they'll have gained a tonne more experience which will set them up better for the next tournament. After the gutting of this side I'd say it should go to after the tournament like you say.

Because that's not trying your hardest to win the tournament. (Or go as far as you can). Why is a tournament in the future more important than a tournament right now? Remember, England will only get probably 4 or 5 games in the Euros. I am totally willing to forego 5 games of international experience for a currently less useful player, in order to get to, say, a quarter final instead of the first knock-out round. I find it such a strange precedent to say you're already looking towards the next tournament when this one hasn't even begun.

# ¿ Apr 20, 2012 00:24

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Paperhouse posted:

I don't think age or reputation has anything to do with it, I'd just pick the team that I think is the best team.

I think maybe some people have the mentality that all of the older players should be shipped out for younger ones, but that isn't how you create the team most likely to win

This is absolutely what I'm saying.

After the Euros, all the guys who will not be playing in the World Cup are out for good.

[edit]oh yeah gerrards still good enough by the way

[edit2]haha remember when Matthew Upson went to the world cup, was totally poo poo, and scored a goal?

Hoops fucked around with this message at Apr 20, 2012 around 01:12

# ¿ Apr 20, 2012 00:44

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

I have a feeling it'll be Walcott, Welbeck, Carroll in the middle. Which may actually work okay, thinking about it now.

# ¿ Apr 20, 2012 17:45

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

I don't want Carroll either but he was playing a lot shitter than he is now when he got called up against Ghana. If they're going to play 4-3-3 I think he's going. He brings certain things to the table that none of the others do. If only he was better at playing football.

# ¿ Apr 20, 2012 18:58

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

Harry likes Carroll remember. Spurs did bid �25m for him just before he came to Liverpool.

# ¿ Apr 20, 2012 19:14

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 26, 2013 04:26

Hoops: Aug 19, 2005; A Black Mark For Retarded Posting

FullLeatherJacket posted:

Everyone just pretend this is exactly what I said last night, because it's better than how I said it.

quote:

I thought this was just rumoured and not what actually happened

Admittedly I am only going off tabloid reporting here, but I've never heard anything that says it didn't happen. You were probably following Carroll stories closer than I was at the time to be fair.

# ¿ Apr 20, 2012 19:23

«‹›4 »

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Sports Argument Stadium* > The Ray Parlour > EMNT Thread: JT is SOL