breadandcheese Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 You don't have a clue. I have criticised Sven for many years and I continue to believe that he's a piss poor manager who will achieve nothing noteworthy. I don't believe we have the squad that's good enough to win the World Cup with Sven or anyone else. The English game isn't suited to possession football, which is what it takes to win the World Cup these days. Just because I don't join in with the Sven bashing after every match it doesn't mean I accept lacklustre performances. But this wasn't one of them in my opinion. Don't know about that. I don't think we've really had a chance to use our English blood and guts style. For all those who said the 4-5-1 worked today. I'm not so sure it did. We were defensively sound against a very poor team (individual error by Terry excepted), yet looked unlikely to break this very poor team down in open play. For those who said we created chances, how many of you actually believed we were about to score. Fact is, our best chances are from set pieces, because Sven has not yet, nor is capable of picking our best team. In my mind, we have stumbled through to another win, looked poor nd hope we can turn it round. Against a well-organised team, we will be shown to be severely lacking if we play like we did today. In my mind, we are wasting one of the most talented squads we have had in recent years.
Bert Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 Focking hell, you ungracious gits. Until we lose, shut up and stop moaning, because we're still in the World Cup, and therefore still have a chance of winning. The above is obviously not aimed at some of you, who i'm sure thought today's performance was reasonably good. Spot on young James. By this logic so have the Faroes when the qualifiers start. Well this isn't the qualifiers and the Faroes aren't expected to do well, whereas apparently we are.
Solihullfox Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 Spot on young James. Well this isn't the qualifiers and the Faroes aren't expected to do well, whereas apparently we are. I blame Mark de Vries and Craig Levein, arsewipes.
Wils Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 I blame Mark de Vries and Craig Levein, arsewipes. why not!!!!
davieG Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 Don't know about that. I don't think we've really had a chance to use our English blood and guts style. For all those who said the 4-5-1 worked today. I'm not so sure it did. We were defensively sound against a very poor team (individual error by Terry excepted), yet looked unlikely to break this very poor team down in open play. For those who said we created chances, how many of you actually believed we were about to score. Fact is, our best chances are from set pieces, because Sven has not yet, nor is capable of picking our best team. In my mind, we have stumbled through to another win, looked poor nd hope we can turn it round. Against a well-organised team, we will be shown to be severely lacking if we play like we did today. In my mind, we are wasting one of the most talented squads we have had in recent years. Agree we didn't need Carrick there because Gerrard and Lampard played as deep as they do when we have two strikers. Rather than 4-1-4-1 or 4-5-1 it was more like 4-3-2(wide) 1 there was a massive void behind Rooney most of the time and they were still lobbing long balls up to him which were not only out of his reach most of the time, but they were knackering him having to chase them and when he got them he had their whole defence to beat on his own.
Ricey Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 I blame Mark de Vries and Craig Levein, arsewipes. TBH it all stems back to Peter Taylor.
MC Prussian Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 All in all, the English were lucky to have Beckham in the squad today. One glimpse of genius made the difference in an otherwise uninspired, pretty much boring matchup. I saw some England fans yawn and fall asleep while the game was still underway...
Nationwider Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 Ignoring all I abhor about SGE's approach to football the biggest worry to me tactically is that whenever England get ahead they attempt to shut up shop. This is SGE's achilles heel and I think it will be his undoing this time (in one of the next two matches). I was expecting an Equador equaliser, and was quite surprised we didn't get one. Full credit to the players for at least trying to stick to SGE's latest hair-brained scheme. The fact that we are in the QFs is testament to the quality of our squad, not to SGE's tactics. I actually think Sven has begun the final descent into madness. I admire Wayne Rooney's pluck, skill and endeavour because he should never, ever be asked to play up front alone like that again - its such a waste of his talent. We should have kicked the Grannies out of Ecuador (no disrespect etc), but we made such hard work of a fairly routine victory. Forgive me for playing the same record over and over again, but England's squad is best suited to a 4-4-2 with Gerrard playing an advanced midfield role: ------------ Crouch ---------------------- ------------------------ Rooney --------- -------------------------------------------- ---------------- Gerrard ----------------- Cole --------------------------- Beckham --------- Carrick/Hargreaves ----------- -------------- Back 4 --------------------- Look Sven! Your two best players (Gerrard and Rooney) playing in their usual, prefered positions!!!! Just imagine it!
Hullfox Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 I can't believe what I'm reading. People call me a moaner but you guys take the biscuit. We may have been poor in the 1st half but in the second half we were comfortable and looked worthy winners. So what if we didn't play the cavalier 'all out attack' card that some of you crave? Ecuador barely caused us any problems bar the Terry mistake, and we could and should have scored at least 2 or three more but for some poor shooting yet again from Lampard. I can criticise like the best of them but I was happy with that performance. Some people are just never happy unless you play like Brazil. Nuff said.
Hullfox Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 I'm sorry. That bore no relaion to the football I used to love and get thrilled about. I would rather they buy a facsimile World Cup to display somewhere that gives an impression of importance and achievement if that's the only way they'll convince themselves they can do anything but turn my beloved game into something of inconsequence. You are welcome to it Anish. You really are. The words "they know not what they do" come to mind. People will do anything for money and this is just another example. If I had my way I would banish SGE to somewhere like the Galapogas Islands where he can play to his hearts content with the lizards, turtles and puffins or whatever else they have there. Anything to keep him away from football. He transforms the potential thrills of football into something akin to the card game of patience - just one long banal routine. Even if he wins the World Cup with this sort of offering I shall get no satisfaction from it. It will be on a par with watching a flop film from the world's great actors. As an advertisement for football SGE manages to turn every England scene into a the equivalent third rate horror - except the good guy just manages to win. Thrach You're sounding more like Ron Manager as the days pass. I doubt that the football you loved and got thrilled about really existed to the extent that you say. Was it really that attacking and beautiful? Were all the managers of this time gone by tactical geniuses? Like it or not, SGE's record as a a manager stands up against most of his peers and his predecessors. Jumpers for goal posts anyone?
Ultra Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 Don't know about that. I don't think we've really had a chance to use our English blood and guts style. For all those who said the 4-5-1 worked today. I'm not so sure it did. We were defensively sound against a very poor team (individual error by Terry excepted), yet looked unlikely to break this very poor team down in open play. For those who said we created chances, how many of you actually believed we were about to score. Fact is, our best chances are from set pieces, because Sven has not yet, nor is capable of picking our best team. In my mind, we have stumbled through to another win, looked poor nd hope we can turn it round. Against a well-organised team, we will be shown to be severely lacking if we play like we did today. In my mind, we are wasting one of the most talented squads we have had in recent years. Absolutely. Players who perform on a regular basis in the Premiership, Champions League etc have consistently failed to deliver in the last couple of weeks. Sven has to take the blame for this. He obviously can't motivate or inspire at all.
Nationwider Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 Absolutely. Players who perform on a regular basis in the Premiership, Champions League etc have consistently failed to deliver in the last couple of weeks. Sven has to take the blame for this. He obviously can't motivate or inspire at all. Every time the camera pans to him mid-match, he looks like a confused elderly relative who's been taken out by his family for the day. We've done ok thus far, but mainly because the draw was kind to us. Holland are a decent side (not as good as 10 years ago - and ok, not top-seeded), but they've had to play Argentina, Ivory Coast and Portugal! We've not got close to that kind of opposition so far. When we get to see a decent side, I hope he's got more up his sleeve than "Heeeeeere's Theo!" The Loony Swede's going to win this though, isn't he? I can just feel it.
Ultra Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 The Loony Swede's going to win this though, isn't he? I can just feel it. It'll be the biggest crime against football ever if he does.. Brazil, Argentina, Spain and even Germany ( ) have produced performances light-years beyond anything we've come up with.
Jordan Posted 25 June 2006 Posted 25 June 2006 The many Ecuadorians in my town are sad but all in all they must be thrilled with their team's effort this year. England gets a big boost from a crazy ref as they won't be seeing Deco in the quarters, but they'll still need a lot more than they gave today to get by Portugal, my pick from the beginning to win it all (although to be fair the hot weather must have stifled their play a little).
Stevosevic Posted 26 June 2006 Posted 26 June 2006 It'll be the biggest crime against football ever if he does.. Brazil, Argentina, Spain and even Germany ( ) have produced performances light-years beyond anything we've come up with. i dont think many of us will be complaining if he did. but i will still think he is t**t
Luke_Leicester_Lad Posted 26 June 2006 Author Posted 26 June 2006 The many Ecuadorians in my town are sad but all in all they must be thrilled with their team's effort this year. England gets a big boost from a crazy ref as they won't be seeing Deco in the quarters, but they'll still need a lot more than they gave today to get by Portugal, my pick from the beginning to win it all (although to be fair the hot weather must have stifled their play a little). Credit to Ecuador, they played really well.
davieG Posted 26 June 2006 Posted 26 June 2006 Ashley Cole: England's left-back admitted the team had been frustrated by Ecuador's dour approach but hopes the more positive style of Portugal will suit them in Saturday's quarter-final. Perhaps they were frustrated by our dour approach?
Thracian Posted 26 June 2006 Posted 26 June 2006 Thrach You're sounding more like Ron Manager as the days pass. I doubt that the football you loved and got thrilled about really existed to the extent that you say. Was it really that attacking and beautiful? Were all the managers of this time gone by tactical geniuses? Like it or not, SGE's record as a a manager stands up against most of his peers and his predecessors. Jumpers for goal posts anyone? Sir Matt Busby, Bill Shankly, Bill Nicholson, Bob Paisley, to name a few, would have wept to be associated with the sort of football being played by England. Their teams never really became constipated by having endless tactical theories thrust up their arses, rather they armed themselves with skilled players and encouraged them to do what they were good at within a modestly responsible framework. I don't think there is much wrong with today's players by comparison - just the straightjacket of fear which cloaks their organisers. I am not talking about Sven's record - George Graham had a good record and the Italians once dominated the European game with their endlessly boring 1-0's - I am talking about what he represents in football terms and to me he's like the Angel of Death. I look forward to watching Argentina, Brazil, Ghana and one or two more but the prospect of watching England is beginning to feel more like duty than the promise of something special.
Sparky Posted 26 June 2006 Posted 26 June 2006 Sir Matt Busby, Bill Shankly, Bill Nicholson, Bob Paisley, to name a few, would have wept to be associated with the sort of football being played by England. Their teams never really became constipated by having endless tactical theories thrust up their arses, rather they armed themselves with skilled players and encouraged them to do what they were good at within a modestly responsible framework. I don't think there is much wrong with today's players by comparison - just the straightjacket of fear which cloaks their organisers. I am not talking about Sven's record - George Graham had a good record and the Italians once dominated the European game with their endlessly boring 1-0's - I am talking about what he represents in football terms and to me he's like the Angel of Death. I look forward to watching Argentina, Brazil, Ghana and one or two more but the prospect of watching England is beginning to feel more like duty than the promise of something special. you make good points thracth but are we playing this style because sven belives we dont have the players to do otherwise . i use bolton as an example , there style of football is boring to the eye but constantly finish top 10 . if they were to play an expansive flowing positive match with the players at there disposal would they be doing as well ? if this is the reason sven is playin like this then he is deluded . for me system is being changed far too much , on a game to game basis at present . i think now that it has to be a case of EITHER lampard or gerrard alongside a good solid passer / tackler of the ball which at present hargreaves or carrick would be the man . lampard would be the man to miss out for me the other option to have both stevie g and lamps in a 4-4-2 could be to play gerrard in his club role on the right and drop becks .
Bert Posted 26 June 2006 Posted 26 June 2006 Well Thrach, that was then and this is now, get over it.
Ultra Posted 26 June 2006 Posted 26 June 2006 you make good points thracth but are we playing this style because sven belives we dont have the players to do otherwise . i use bolton as an example , there style of football is boring to the eye but constantly finish top 10 . if they were to play an expansive flowing positive match with the players at there disposal would they be doing as well ? if this is the reason sven is playin like this then he is deluded . for me system is being changed far too much , on a game to game basis at present . i think now that it has to be a case of EITHER lampard or gerrard alongside a good solid passer / tackler of the ball which at present hargreaves or carrick would be the man . lampard would be the man to miss out for me the other option to have both stevie g and lamps in a 4-4-2 could be to play gerrard in his club role on the right and drop becks . We're not Greece, forced by limited resources and personnel to follow a particular game plan. We have some genuinely talented players at our disposal, who in many cases have consistently excelled at club level (and occasionally for England too). Why do the likes of Mourinho, Wenger, Ferguson et al enable these players to reach their potential, and Sven so rarely does? There is no reason why Gerrard and Lampard cannot play well in the same team - if Gerrard had moved to Chelsea you can guarantee Jose Mourinho would have found a way. Sven looks like yesterday's man with every game England play.
davieG Posted 26 June 2006 Posted 26 June 2006 We're not Greece, forced by limited resources and personnel to follow a particular game plan. We have some genuinely talented players at our disposal, who in many cases have consistently excelled at club level (and occasionally for England too). Why do the likes of Mourinho, Wenger, Ferguson et al enable these players to reach their potential, and Sven so rarely does? There is no reason why Gerrard and Lampard cannot play well in the same team - if Gerrard had moved to Chelsea you can guarantee Jose Mourinho would have found a way. Sven looks like yesterday's man with every game England play. Well as he probably picked up his excessive salary before yesterday I doubt he give a &^(*&^*)*&^^&%.
Daggers Posted 26 June 2006 Posted 26 June 2006 The Loony Swede's going to win this though, isn't he? I can just feel it. Is this the same feeling I get leading up to every lottery draw?
Ric Flair Posted 27 June 2006 Posted 27 June 2006 This playing dreadful football and still winning is actually getting quite hilarious. I would love it, absolutely love it if we managed to win this world cup by playing absolutely horrendously. The footballing world would be in uproar and to be honest that would leave them all looking like fools and not us. I still stand by my statement. Any team can win games when they play well. A team that can win games when they play badly is a far more dangerous outfit. The opposition put pressure on themselves because they know that even if England don't play well they have a mentality and a habit of still getting results. That might not be music to people's ears who want to see us play football we can be proud of (me included) but even though i'm pained to say it, results is all that matters. Performances rarely get remembered unless it's combined with a victory or a massive loss I suppose (but we haven't been losing much recently). Saturday is make or break, if we win and don't play well then that pisses on everyone's fire that says we'll get blown away if we don't play well against a big team. If we lose and play badly then fair enough this will go down as abit of an embrassing tournament from the flatterers of England. If we win and play well then heaven knows what will happen, the doom merchants will be back out with their free world cup dolls and crap little flags they got free with 55 litres of unleaded and the dream is on. From what I can see, there's still nothing to get excited or not get excited about. We are in the quarter finals, which is standard procedure for England. I can't predict what will happen, but what I will do is get behind my country and hope, pray and believe that this is our time. From my point of view, I just love the whole thing about the World Cup and this country uniting, mainly up the pub. That's what I like and although when we're playing badly, I might use some expletives at the screen in the pub but once that goal goes in that keeps winning us the matches, most things are forgotten and the party continues long in to the night which gives me nights to remember. Good things come to those who wait. We've waited along while.
Daggers Posted 27 June 2006 Posted 27 June 2006 I still stand by my statement. Any team can win games when they play well. A team that can win games when they play badly is a far more dangerous outfit. The opposition put pressure on themselves because they know that even if England don't play well they have a mentality and a habit of still getting results. That might not be music to people's ears who want to see us play football we can be proud of (me included) but even though i'm pained to say it, results is all that matters. Performances rarely get remembered unless it's combined with a victory or a massive loss I suppose (but we haven't been losing much recently). ... Good things come to those who wait. We've waited along while. And Mr. Flair wins todays half-full bottle of champagne for his continued work on behalf of the optimistic. It must be drunk half-full glass by half-full glass. ...as long as you don't go getting half-cut
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.