On England…
“Wake up. You didn’t lose the game because of the tactics. We’re simply a better team. I admire your team and your players but my team is a much better team.”
That is what the Croat manager had to say after the game at Wembley. Not only has he used the word ‘team’ four times in two sentences, but he has also purposely made a false statement driven by his desire to rub salt into England’s wounds. Or so I like to think. Truth being told, England were woeful on Wednesday night, but the Croat team — the one which qualified after having beaten England twice — is by no means overall better than the current English team. But the manager… that is another story.
Thursday we will wake up, have a cup of coffee or a glass of whiskey — depending on preferences — turn our computers on and visit the BBC website which will display the ‘Breaking News’ that McClaren has been sacked. It cannot be any other way or a revolution will break out. So terrible has England been in the past eighteen months that some of us are starting to miss the Eriksson days.
Then the madness will begin: the FA will start their search for a new manager. Given that England do not have another competitive match for a whole year, the FA will see the urgency of hiring the first man to send in an application. But who will be that man? Who will dare to put his head under the guillotine? Whoever it will be, he or she — just because you never know how crazy the gentlemen from the FA are — will have the most difficult job in English football.
He will have to build a young squad which will reach its prime in the summer of 2010, change the clearly flawed tactics, gain respect from and instil fear in the hearts of his players, find a way to entertain fans and also find a goalkeeper capable of catching a ball. In doing all of this, he must of course ensure that national team shirt sales do not go down and manage to somehow lure fans to Wembley every time England play. Given on what I have seen from England this qualification campaign, I wonder whether it is worth it to watch the game on TV, never mind paying for a ticket to stand in the rain watching a bunch of clowns trying to kick a ball.
The squad issue will be the biggest he will face. It will not only be difficult because the pressure of keeping an impotent Lampard and Mr. I-cannot-make-a-ten-yard-pass Gerrard will be huge, but the truth is that England has to move away from these two players. Whether this has to be done through a step-by-step transition or instantly is debatable. The reality is that both of them need to leave the England team now!
Future squads will be based around the attacking power of young stars Rooney and Agbonlahor, but with Young and Moore also rising in stature, Owen still able to come on as an impact player — he will not be able to play regularly for club and country the way he is these days — and Crouch still not old, England might have some firepower. In defence Taylor of Newcastle is very promising and Richards will be there for years to come since there is no chance of Neville replacing him. Cole is still young and Terry will be around for the next World Cup.
The problem will arise in midfield. Will Huddlestone ever be able to put on an England shirt? Can Hargreaves continue to hold the midfield? Does Barry have a future with England? Can they play Bentley (or, according to Blackburn, Betnely) in central midfield? Who between Walcott, Lennon or SWP will take over the right wing and who will play on the left wing? My answers would be ‘no’, ‘yes’, ‘yes’, ‘yes’, ‘neither’ and ‘still Cole’. However, a professional manager might think otherwise of England’s midfield. There are precious few young, talented central midfielders in England these days and there might be the temptation to play it safe with Lampard or Gerrard, but there is a probability that, should he do this, the next manager will have a very similar fate to that of McClaren or Eriksson.
Another big dilemma that the next man in charge of England will face will be choosing a goalkeeper. Can anyone muster the courage to bring Robinson back? Doubtful. Certainly not unless he put on a magical spell for Tottenham. The other possibilities are James who can also be a bit shaky at times, Carson who we just saw make a schoolyard mistake, Foster who definitely has the quality, he just needs to play more and Green who seems to be just the man. Of course there are other options, but these seem to me to be the best.
The England squad, both today’s and the one that will take to the field in 2010, looks to be every manager’s dream on paper. In reality there has been little to smile about for any of England’s previous two managers. What England need now is an experienced manager who can pull of results. Given these criteria, the FA will likely opt for Alan Shearer who has never been in charge of a club. And ahead of us lie another two years of immense frustration and eventual failure. We cannot kid ourselves, England will not turn into a powerhouse overnight, but given the right choice of management and players, it is possible to make them serious contenders by the next World Cup.
Finally we should all begin to understand what Eriksson was all about. He wanted results above all else and he usually delivered — losing in the quarter-finals of three consecutive competitions now sounds a little like paradise. We now get to see that he is really a talented manager, but one of his flaws, one that he shared with McClaren was lack of wit. We need a manager who would take action if all is not right! Ideally, the Special One.
Topics: England, European Championships, Steve McClaren
Football News 24/7
From what I saw, Croatia were definitely the better team yesterday. England were pathetically hopeless. Apart from Crouch and Beckham(of all people) the english team were meek and clueless to the last degree. You can blame the manager for failing to motivate the players(but at least he made two good substitutions), but looking at yesterday’s match the players definitely beats the manager for taking the blame…………..
November 22nd, 2007 @ 08:09I totaly disagree with the croatia manager.. If terry and ferdinand and rooney and owen and robinson were on.. it would not be a problem..
November 22nd, 2007 @ 08:10Did anyone else find it amusing that what England were screaming out for a was a central, defensive minded midfielder who knew what they were doing? (no Barry that’s not you). The reason the Croatians had such a force attacking, and we lacked any fluency, was becuase we had not a soul in the middle circle cleaning up, and stopping counter attacks. Because Steven Gerrard has the mental maturity of a 2 year old, and Fat Frank’s attempts at tackling involve making himself big. Which isn’t hard. If only England had a proven, world class, champions league ball winner in their midst. Oh. They do. And instead we started with a left midfielder and brought on Darren Bent. Shocking.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 09:04England needs a new manager. Unfortunately most managers will only be available after the Euro (either that or pick an unemployed one, like Klinsmann).
PS: The Special One is not available for national squads yet (maybe when he’s 60…).
November 22nd, 2007 @ 10:37barry was all over the place
gerrard couldnt make a proper pass
lampard was non existant until the penalty
richards was ball watching
bridge was too slow
McLaren was expressionless sitting/standing under his umbrella!!
bah I could go on and on but now the reality is that england have not qualified and they need to move on.
Not make an enquiry into why they didnt quailfy etc etc crap.
just put your hands up and say we lost it lets look to the future!!
but that will never happen will it!!
November 22nd, 2007 @ 10:57What nobody fails to realise is England cannot keep the ball. If you look at any successful international team, the key to their success is ball retention. The focus on the coaching of England’s youth is not to keep the ball or be technically superior to their opponents. All these players who you mention, Agbonlahor, Lennon, etc etc, they are all products of the coaching in this country that focuses on speed of attack rather than patient build-up play. Yesterday, did you see how after England got it back to 2-2, they dropped off the Croats? All they had to do was keep the ball and they were home and dry. With 25 mins to go, that is all that was required of them; but they were unable to do this. These players, Gerrard, Lampard etc, they are used to the powerful crash-bang English Premiership style of play…but when it comes to international football, they look like amateurs. If you cannot keep the ball you fail. Everybody loves the Premiership because it is exciting, but it is destroying the national team, as with the exception of Arsenal (note, no players in the Eng squad) and Man United, every other team would rather focus on long ball football than ball retention. Until players learn to keep the ball and be patient in attack, England will fail time and time again.
Furthermore, football in this country is not helped by the media who constantly over-hype players and sports news. It sensationalises and glorifies events which should not be given as much attention or coverage. English players are paid far too much. They do not play for the country anymore, but for their new 5 year contract to write autobiographies on a life which (a) can’t be all that fascinating and (b)is not even in its latter stages! It is ridiculous. I wonder what would happen if the England players were stripped of all of their money, cars, clothes and whatever else they have earned which has caused them to forget what their job is, and then made to play football. Maybe they would gain some heart and remember they are playing for this country and not for their wallets.
The entire FA needs to be removed if anything is to really change. Drastic changes must be made. The way football is run in this country must be altered if England have any chance of succeeding in the future.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 11:57[Quote Beachryan}"Steven Gerrard has the mental maturity of a 2 year old" LMFAO. M8 you couldn't be more right about this. He whines and whines about stuff and lately has been commenting on all sorts of stuff. He should shut up, get some professional mental help(he's manic depressive) and get rid of that northern chip off his shoulder.
As for the defensive mid thing from the article above. The problem is that Gerrard should play there happily and allow Frank Lampard to do what he's best at. While I understand that Gerrard's best position is attacking mid, he is capable of playing right (good crossing) and defensive mid (great engine/tackling and can join attack). He could be Roy Keane plus, but for the aforementioned childing 2 year old mentality to doing a job for the team. He hasn't played better than 7/10 for England for ages and considering a few good players were missing last night, it was down to him to lead the team and he was incapable.
I have posted in the other article about the game but I want to add this here. When we had 2 up and put balls in they had to turn their mids and defenders towards their own goal and looked bad. When we had one up and two wide we were doing things they could easily deal with and they were never turned because we were trying to get the ball to an area just outside the box.
One shot on their goal in the first half was not good enough. A one goal lead would have left Croatis trying to avoid a tonking and not trying to ruin our party while we played with so much fear. To play for a draw and to stagnate a game at home to a side like Croatia is unacceptable and just plain stupid. The funniest bit of that is that all other countries know England so well. They new we'd play scared and capitalised on it. Hell, we've got 2 (3 with Becks) of the best long shooters in the world and we played wide rather than shooting with 2 forwards to poach the rebounds. England are so dumb and din't deserve to qualify.
There goes the best generation of England talent in my lifetime. Some quarter finals under Sven (decent but average) and now this. Good luck for the future because I can't see players with the potential of Ferdinand, Gerrard, Lampard, J.Cole, Rooney, Campbell and Owen coming along again for a long time. I said potential because I feel, but for J.cole and Campbell, the rest have failed to maximise their talent. Rooney still has a chance but I suspect he'll go the same way as the others. Rio could have been better than Baresi. But sadly he can defend about as well as Frank Sinclair (lucky he's got pace, height and plays in a good team to save him being exposed for his bad defending).
November 22nd, 2007 @ 12:12The truth is England are not and have never been a top team.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 13:47If we are that good how come we’ve always failed to win anything major since 66.
Our defenders aren’t comfortable in possesion,neither are our midfield or forwards.
The ball is like a hot potato and we aren’t that technically gifted to hold onto the ball like the croations,Italians etc.
We are also tacticully naive and our players can’t stick to a game plan!
dave, I agree that England is tactically naive and cannot stick to a game plan, but I do not think that the players are technically inept. Not even the defenders. Look at what Rio is doing at Man Utd and Richards at Man City. I think Zed is right in saying that the speed with which the players play in the internal championship has a massive effect on the national team because players are likely to try to blitz their opponents.
That being said, if we had another coach (here we go again) or maybe players willing to play, this could be used to our advantage. Look at Barcelona and what they do the smaller, slow teams from La Liga. If we manage to use Richards’, SWP’s, Ronney’s and the others’ speed to our advantage than we can frighten the Italians.
Also with regards to the possesion comment. Duh! Look at what Scotland has done. When they played the ball around the midfield in an Arsenal-like manner, the Italians were frightened shitless. You can just imagine the power of Scholes or Lampard in that midfield. They can verticalize the game to perfection and one minute the opponents are defending positionally to the slow build-up play, the next they find themslves out of position and a goal down. Possesion is the way to go but combined with the speed of Agbonlahor it could be lethal. Look at Man Utd last season.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 14:14I’ve read the previous comments around here and have noticed that only one or two addressed this problem: England did not have a defensive midfielder out there who could have challenged the runs of Olic, Eduardo, Kranjcar and Kovac. I’m not an England fan, but I was disappointed to know that the team’s only true tried and tested DMF was on the bench: Hargreaves. This guy, I think was on that bench for more than his injury problems. 1.) McClaren might think he’s slow. Hargreaves played 10 years in the Bundesliga, where coincidentally a lot of these Croatian players play or have played. It’s a technical and physical league. 2.) McClaren thought keeping a draw was possible if he had Gerrard and Lampard in midfield. Question: Who was England’s best player last World Cup? Hargreaves. Why? Against European teams, he’d fight for balls in the middle. Croatia is a team full of imports. Hargreaves himself is an import…I recognize him still as a Bundesliga player… who when he was only 20, faced the likes of Figo, Roberto Carlos and other Real Madrid greats en route to winning 2001 Champions League. Great credentials, equal skill, NO PLAYING TIME. BIG BIG ERROR. UNFORTUNATE FOR ENGLAND. Who do you call? Barry and SWP?
Just noticed something completely lacking in England’s play. Croatia, with players from all over Europe played the way Euro teams play… technical and efficient. Kudos to them. Bad tactics from McClaren.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 15:03When managing a national squad, the main task is not tactics or observe the opponent. the main task is building a cohesive group, that despite results or media pressure sticks together and knows that the manager got the players back.
Example: Ricardo (GK) went trough a tough time at Sporting (with a couple of crucial freak goals) and was bench by the coach for a while. What did Scorali do? He stick with his call and kept Ricardo in the starting XI.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 15:10So why did Maclaren switch to Carson instead of keeping Robinson? It showed the players he had no backbone by giving in to the media…
false statement by Bilic? they beat you convincingly TWICE. what more do they need to do? just because Corluka, Modric, Eduardo and co. don’t command inflated transfer fees doesn’t make them any less talented than the England players. calling the likes of Stevie and Lamps overrated might be a bit cliche now, but they’re certainly providing their detractors with plenty of ammunition. Beckham was a player of true world class and, even past his best, he looked twice as good as either of the current star midfielders, on a night when they really needed to stand up and be counted.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 17:45“Mr. I-cannot-make-a-ten-yard-pass Gerrard”
dude he had to hit every pass far last night on that surface. despite the slip up carson pulled off some good saves and we really missed rooney and terry (and a decent pitch)
November 22nd, 2007 @ 18:00Gerrard was awful, as was most of England. He dribbled too much, did not pass, and dived to get pantom fouls. Lampard took the penalty over him. And as captain, he did a poor job in keeping the England spirit in the first 45 minutes. Another struggling performance.
It wasnt just him though; they were all terrible. No effort, bad energy.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 18:26Funny, I’d say the Croatian team is, overall, better than the English one. Teamwork, understanding, tactics aside, I think the players are on the whole, better. What they aren’t, is as widely well known (interpret this to mean over-rated in some cases if you wish) as their English counterparts.
England has to face up to the facts – and I’m not only refering to the failure to qualify this time around – they are no longer among the elite group of national teams. They haven’t been for a while.
The last truly good English NT side was in 1990. Back then they had one incredibly gifted player, in Gascoigne, and a very solid team from front to back – including the goalkeeper but – look at their record, and the mitigating circumstances, in tournaments since 1990….
In 1996 they made the semifinals, in England, and only after a few performances of dubious quality, including a pretty unjustified quarterfinal win over Spain.
1992: Out in the first round
1994: Failure to qualify
1998: Out in the second round
2000: Out in the first round
After this, they finally did something sensible, and hire a world class, foreign manager.* I’m sure there are quite a few England fans who are looking back at Sven with rather fond memories right now.
2002: Quarterfinals
2004: Quarterfinals
2006: Quarterfinals
Not to mention qualification processes that threw up no surprises, and the occasional good result (Germany 1-5 England, etc). After 3 quarterfinal appearances Sven starting getting a lot of criticism for not being able to take England’s golden generation further. This was so far off the mark it is incredible. There was no golden generation. What was amazing wasn’t that they didn’t go further, but that they made it that far, that many times in a row. This is a massive credit to Sven, as is becoming clear now.
It’s no coincidence that after replacing this world class foreign manager with another English manager…
2008: Failed to qualify
It’s no coincidence that none of the big 4 clubs have an English manager. It’s no coincidence that none of the big 4 clubs have an English keeper. It’s no coincidence that none of the big 4 clubs have even 5 or 6 of what could be considered automatic first choice Englishmen. It’s no coincidence that only 24% of big 4′s “A squads” registered in the Champions League are made up of English players (Chelsea 7 of 23, Man Utd 8 of 23, Arsenal 2 of 25, Liverpool 6 of 25 – uefa.com (and this is including players like Stephen Darby, David Martin, Chris Eagles…))
In other words, it’s no coincidence that England failed to qualify.
This is just my personal opinion, but right now I’d say England only has two truly world class players: John Terry and Wayne Rooney. Then there is a group of players who are quite good, if not world class: Gerrard and Lampard (though apparently not together); the Coles, Beckham or Owen on their day, and some of the remaining central defenders (Woodgate, if not for his injuries, would be world class).
But the rest of the players that Ive seen over the last few years in an England shirt are little more than acceptable; they are good players for small/middle-sized clubs, squad players for big clubs, and there is an overwhelming, and alarming lack of depth in quality.
Does this mean they have a bad team? Not at all. What it means is that England is no different, in these terms, than teams like Sweden, or Croatia. What -is- different, perhaps, is that these sides had a little less complacency, and a better manager. And that’s why they’ll be in Austria-Switzerland this summer and England will not.
*Sensible, apart from the fact that I think hiring a foreign manager is antithetical to the notion of “National Team Football” (why can I hire a world class foreign manager to manage my national side, but not, say, hire a world class foreign striker?)
November 22nd, 2007 @ 19:34taking penalties doesnt make a good player… better finishers take penalties and lampard was the best finisher on the pitch at the time so its only natural he take it.
If england were overall crap the blame should go on england not on Gerrard and Barry.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 19:58avrv, I simply cannot agree with you. Yes, the England team has not had the desired quality for many years now, but Eriksson did not do the impossible in taking England to 3 succesive quarter-finals, he did the minimum acceptable. Player for player, England have enough talent to deserve its #5 world ranking – which will now dissapear in the fog. What they do not have is the ability (whether this is caused by an indifference to the national team, inability to play with each other or horrible coaching decisions is debatable) to play as a team.
You only mention Terry as a world class defender, but what about Rio? The guy is fantastic for Man Utd and is one of the few who also plays well for England. A Cole is also great for England – or at least was until recently. In midfield there is Gerrard, a player who many – Kaka included – consider to be the best in his position. He might not turn it on for England, but his talent is indisputable. Lampard has been, along with Didi, the engine of Chelsea during the Mourinho days, but he can’t turn it on for England either. Rooney is just fantastic and Owen has got to be… has got to be… well, let’s just say hes good.
England face problems similar to those of Spain and Holland. They have some of the best players in Europe, these three, but they all falter. The problem is not related to the quality of the player, rather to the fusion (or call it whatever you choose) bewteen the players that show up at Wembley on any given night. To give you an example of the ‘fusion’, remember the Estonia match and how SWP and Richard combined. If the team can extend that kind of chemistry all over the field and keep doing it for a few matches, England will become superb – just like Spain against Sweden.
BTW I am livid that you can compare England to the Swede national team in terms of sum of talent. I wish to remind you that there are players from countries like Togo which are well known and yet they are not nearly a good team. Players become known because they play for good teams or do exceptionally well with lowly teams. If players are not known it could be either because they are young – look at Walcott two years ago – or because they have not yet been discovered – look at Vidic.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 20:02Liverpool_Fan, being able to bury a penalty makes a player far better than his team-mate who cannot bury them but is more talented. Being able to take penalties demostrates that the player is phychologically strong – a quality which is invaluable.
randy, that is why i said ‘or so i like to think’ and ‘but’. Please re-read the first paragraph.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 20:05Over the years, one thing that I have noticed is that England have problems changing rhythm and pace during the game. Perhaps due to the extreme pace of the EPL, or the inability of the manager to teach different systems. If we examine successful teams on the international stage, usually they also move off the ball very well. As Johan Cruyff said, “You have the ball for 5 minutes. It’s the other 85 that are equally or more important.”
For example, one of the keys of Italy’s win in WC06 was the ability of Lippi’s players to change a module, during the game, to adapt to the present needs on the pitch. It takes a proper blend of players and a coach to implement this approach.
Argentina, Brasil, Germany, Italy et al enter a tournament with the intent to win. Anything less is failure. Quarterfinal finishes should not be milestones for a program with the pedigree of England.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 20:13Get as livid as you want, but my point was that the problem with England goes far beyond one or two poor performances in this qualifying campaign. And I think this was clearly illustrated. It is an endemic problem, from top to bottom: An FA that seems pretty incompetent, a total lack of good English managers, and a derth of technical quality amongst its players. Who is really, truly, “skillful” in the England squad? I would say Rooney, Joe Cole, and SWP, occasionally. And it ends right there.
As for Sweden, don’t be so harsh on them. Eleven of Sweden’s players play on mid/upper-level teams in Germany, France, and England (Premiership players make up the single largest group). There are a smattering at other clubs around Europe, such as Ajax, Galatasaray, Panathinaikos, Basel, and the rest (6 or so) playing “locally” in Scandinavia. Oh, and Ibrahimovic at Internazionale. In other words, a world class player, a few good players (Ljungberg, Isaakson, Kallstrom), and the rest solid, squad-level players, at mid-level clubs. More or less like England. I’ll grant you that there might be one or two more world class English players (though none better than Ibrahimovic), and a handful more good English players, but consider that we’re talking about England – pop. 51,000,000 to Sweden’s 9,500,000; all the tradition, history, and money of the Premiership etc. When you think of it this way, the distance in quality isn’t all that great.
But the real proof is in the pudding… Sweden easily qualified from a group that was no easier than England’s. Their record since 1990, is no worse than England’s:
1992: Semifinals
November 22nd, 2007 @ 22:001994: Third place
1996: Failed to Qualify
1998: Failed to Qualify
2000: Out in the first round
2002: Out in the second round
2004: Quarterfinalists
2006: Out in the second round
2008: Qualified
One more thing I’d like to add…I think the comparisons with Holland and Spain can only be made on the surface. In other words, you can compare the similarity of results, but not the causes.
November 22nd, 2007 @ 22:06Causes of Spain’s poor results can be comparable with England’s. Their attack force, now made of Torres, Villa, Silva and others is – talent-wise – superb, but they cannot play well together and deliver the goods. It is the same stroy for England in midfield: they have the players but, for whatever reason, they cannot play together. Holland is a whole different story though. I do not think there is an unlucky-er (if such a word exists) team in world football.
Oh and given the evidence, I guess you have a point with the Sweden thing.
But then, how do you explain Germany? Constantly at the top and yet they do not have more than two world class players (Lahm and Klose, if you must know). Metzelder, Mertesaker, Borowski, Bastian, Kuranyi, Sneijder, Lehmann, Podolski are all good players but not as good as the England team overall. In my opinion it just goes to show that much depends on the organization of the team (and if you have met any German people you know that they are generally very organizd people) also work ethic is a major factor in that team – you saw what happened to Kahn.
November 23rd, 2007 @ 03:20Croatia was definitely better on wednesday, I really feel sorry for the england players because such a team with so big names when is not going through to te euro finals the i think it is a loss for EURO. But in the other hand I’m so happy that my country get into the finals first time in the history:). I wish well England i next qulify.
November 23rd, 2007 @ 03:36I really do have to blame, however, the failings of England’s roster on McClaren.
Steven Gerrard is one of the most overrated players in the world. he is great, but all year has been mired in listless, mediocre to awful performances. His appointment as Vice Captain looks to be a huge mistake, and not that he isn’t qualified to fit the bill, but that it guarantees him a spot in the Starting Xi when he needs to be benched to regain some motivation and heart.
Frank Lampard is possibly one of the most underrated players in the world. He is a fantastic attacking midfielder, and we all know his defensive struggles at times. He has been in peak form for Chelsea this season and has been arguably one of the Most Valuable Players in the Premiership.
Together, this midfield combo should dominate, but they do not. I believe it is that neither know their roles when they play together. McClaren forcing a 4-4-2 upon them and throwing them in the central midfield hasn’t helped. Ideally, under a new manager, Frank Lamaprd will be allowed to push up farther into the opposition’s defense, while Gerrard sits back as a distributor and clean up man.
England’s next problem: an obvious lack of striking and goalkeeping talent. Can anyone name the best English keeper? Can anyone name the best consistent striker these days behind Rooney? These positions have to be fixed because England’s defense can be among the world’s best, yet they suffer from debilitating problems at the offensive and keeper positions.
The new manager, and if the FA was smart it would do everything possible to get Mourinho in that position, needs to establish roles for Lampard and Gerrard in the midfield, or drop one or both (and the obvious answer shouldn’t be just to keep Gerrard.) He needs to find consistent and reliable keeping in the net and find Wayne Rooney a partner and a consistent backup. The U-21′s need to be raided and younger players brought up to replace older and/or fading talents. And he also needs to find a long-term replacement for David Beckham, because as good as he is, the World Cup in 2010 will be, if England even qualifies, his last meaningful international competition at most.
November 23rd, 2007 @ 04:22To follow up about Gerrard, because it seems that I annoint him as awful and then mention him as great. The only beef I have with Gerrard is that he is treated as God and the best player on Earth, when he is not. I guess that makes the beef with the English media and not Gerrard. He consistently receives a free pass when he sucks, and this needs to change, because he could be even better if he was brought down to Earth a bit.
In spite of all of this, he is a fantastic player, which is why I am so critical of him in an England shirt, and in a Liverpool shirt this season.
November 23rd, 2007 @ 04:26Becks was, without doubt, the best player on the pitch yesterday (for the half that he was allowed). England have a genuine advantage with 6’7″ goal-threat Crouch when he’s coupled with “best-crosser-of-his-era” Beckham, and despite Beck’s age, there is only suggestion that this tandem represent the best England goal threat.
Why start SWP?? Hell, why even *play* SWP?!?! Becks is class and showed (in generating the equaliser) his indespensibility. Viva Becks, long live Becks for England.
November 23rd, 2007 @ 07:44Come on, Brian! Lampard is underrated? Then what do you have to say about O’Shea or Flamini? Lamps has been alright this season, but nowhere near the stadard that he has set up for himslef in the past. Many people find him to be the best of his position and if you still say he is underrated then you must think that he is better than Zidane. In my opinion Gerrard is better – when he actually plays to his potential – than Lamps.
Also the midfield enigma was solved by Hargreaves… but Macca cannot, no, wait, could not decide on whether to drop Gerrard or Lampard, so he plays them both and Owen is left hanging. Disastruos!
kris, Beckham is class, but he cannot play for England untilf infinity (unfortunately). England needs to change to SWP because he can play brilliantly with Micah, but the transition needs to be a smooth one. Beckham can still be part of the set up, but he cannot expect to start every game or even to play every game. It would be a stupidity to not take him to South Africa (assuming they are going to qualify).
November 23rd, 2007 @ 14:59