The Doctor Posted 21 May 2010 Posted 21 May 2010 I think that you have come down with a severe dose of the Aquilani's Fat AL - one of the worst cases of literal mindedness I've come across in a long, long time. My metaphor 'kicking on one's own continent' was meant to convey a sense of familiarity not one of proximity. The Maghreb may be a long way from the Cape but the Algerian national team are well used to the sights, sounds and smells of black Africa as they play most of their football there (friendlies, African Nations/World Cup qualifiers and finals). Whether this experience really does give them an edge is a moot point. It's rather like a quack remedy: if you believe in it enough it will work. Fortune may have smiled upon them in their encounter with Coted'Ivoire and possibly too in their play-off with Egypt. But fortune, as they say, favours the brave and contrary to what lame brain Aquilani would have us believe you don't qualify for World Cups because of luck alone. Your statements that the Desert Foxes are a weak team and that Belhadj is their stellar talent are based largely on ignorance. Well over half the Algerian squad will be drawn from the top flight in England, France, Germany and Italy and that fact alone should be enough to get the warning lights flashing. Many of the national squad have had more settled careers and/or played for more prestigious clubs than Belhadj. Karim Ziani (Wolfsberg) is widely acclaimed as Algeria's best player though in time he may well be superceded by 'Le Petit Zidane' Mourad Meghni (Lazio) - do you get the picture? There is no doubt that until recently FIFA ranking criteria disproportionately benefitted North American/Caribbean national sides. I was under the impression that the values given for success in CONCACAF/CONFED by FIFA were subsequently adjusted (I suspect that the USA's current ranking would be higher under the old rules given their relative success last year but I might be wrong). I still think that nations in this neck of the planet are favoured at the expense of other confederations and that this is largely political and driven by FIFA's commercial priorities. Re. the Cote and other African teams, lets get one thing straight - they wouldn't be anybody's roughies if they weren't 'kicking on their own continent'. Period. And anyone who says otherwise is a disingenuous mendacious bastard. A final word about Algeria (and I really do mean that folks). If England do well against the USA (ie performance and result) they will be more likely to do well against Algeria. However if they have a bad day down the mine in Rustenburg, Les Fennecs may sense weakness. And that could leave England in a similar kind of situation with Slovenia to the one they faced against Poland in '86. On the balance of probabilities though I don't think that 'Wazzer' will be faced with the prospect of having to do a 'Gary'. like how Holland, Spain and England play most of their football in Europe such as the areas surrounding Germany? Didn't stop them from failing spectacularly. Let's not forget that france struggled through their group in 06 as well. Evidently not but their qualification was most likely down to luck - They were throughly outclassed by egypt in the african nations cup and as UA stated have failed to beat some of the weaker nations in recent times. No. They're largely based on some uninspiring performances at the african nations cup. Thats utter BS. I can't speak for anyone else but i'd expect Ghana and Maybe the ivory coast (pretty difficult group) to do well because of the top class talent they have regardless of where the tournament is.
Manwell Pablo Posted 21 May 2010 Posted 21 May 2010 Really is no need for all this debate. Simple facts, if England play at the level they played when playing most of the qualifiers and recent friendlies under Cappello, they will win that group, possible at a canter. If they don't which unfortunaly is a distintct possability with any England team at a World Cup. The other three teams are more than capable of getting results against them if they are on song themselves. Their capable sides, all of them.
iBleedLeicesterColours Posted 21 May 2010 Posted 21 May 2010 Good 30 man squad. Hart/Green Carragher Rio Terry Cole Lennon Gerrard Lamps A.Johnson Rooney Defoe Barry won't be fit so that is our strongest side. Perhaps Joe Cole in there. Prefer Johnson to Lennon tbh.
AyewJoking Posted 22 May 2010 Posted 22 May 2010 For the first match, I'd go with (fitness permitting). James Johnson, Terry, Ferdinand, Cole Milner, Lampard, King, Gerrard Rooney, Heskey
Fosse Fox Posted 23 May 2010 Author Posted 23 May 2010 Word out on Scum Street is that Fabio is toying with Rooney as a lone front man, with Lennon and Walcott as the fleet footed flankers and with Gerrard acting as the midfield prompter. Well, whilst I can't argue with the personel, I can't say that I care much for the system(s). Looks to me like Capello is trying to hybridise two seemingly successful (but possibly mutually exclusive) red shite strategies. In red shite Mark I, Walcott & Lennon substitute for Valencia & Nani - cue lots of outswingers to Roo from wide positions. It's an interesting idea and it clearly worked for Manure for half a dozen games or so until Wazzer's knackers gave out. But you don't have to be Einstein to realize that sitting deep with two banks of four against wingers works rather like infantry in square formation against cavalry (they shall not pass). In red shite Mark II, Rooney substitutes for Torres. Now that really is Wayne's World thinking, except that I doubt that the modest Scouse Manc has ever dreamt that he's in the same league as a finisher as El Nino. Don't get me wrong, I can see how this set-up could work ...well in theory at least, based on last night's CL Final. There's a lot about Rooney that reminds me of Diego Milito (and/or the other way round). They're both visionary, agressive, power players blessed with technical qualities who instinctively play the one touch game. Rooney is perhaps better off the ball but Milito is the more natural finisher who can fashion his own chances and, for me, that gives him the edge - you can dominate territory and possession as much as you like (or do a total lock down and throw away the key a la Mourinho) but it don't mean a thing it you ain't shootin' in... Much as I respect the Roo I'm not sure now (as opposed to five years ago) that if he actually found himself in the same positions as Milito last night whether he would replicate his successes (cue grammar free, knee jerk wailing and gnashing of teeth from Aquilani, Fat Al et al).
marbelladave Posted 24 May 2010 Posted 24 May 2010 Word out on Scum Street is that Fabio is toying with Rooney as a lone front man, with Lennon and Walcott as the fleet footed flankers and with Gerrard acting as the midfield prompter. Well, whilst I can't argue with the personel, I can't say that I care much for the system(s). Looks to me like Capello is trying to hybridise two seemingly successful (but possibly mutually exclusive) red shite strategies. In red shite Mark I, Walcott & Lennon substitute for Valencia & Nani - cue lots of outswingers to Roo from wide positions. It's an interesting idea and it clearly worked for Manure for half a dozen games or so until Wazzer's knackers gave out. But you don't have to be Einstein to realize that sitting deep with two banks of four against wingers works rather like infantry in square formation against cavalry (they shall not pass). In red shite Mark II, Rooney substitutes for Torres. Now that really is Wayne's World thinking, except that I doubt that the modest Scouse Manc has ever dreamt that he's in the same league as a finisher as El Nino. Don't get me wrong, I can see how this set-up could work ...well in theory at least, based on last night's CL Final. There's a lot about Rooney that reminds me of Diego Milito (and/or the other way round). They're both visionary, agressive, power players blessed with technical qualities who instinctively play the one touch game. Rooney is perhaps better off the ball but Milito is the more natural finisher who can fashion his own chances and, for me, that gives him the edge - you can dominate territory and possession as much as you like (or do a total lock down and throw away the key a la Mourinho) but it don't mean a thing it you ain't shootin' in... Much as I respect the Roo I'm not sure now (as opposed to five years ago) that if he actually found himself in the same positions as Milito last night whether he would replicate his successes (cue grammar free, knee jerk wailing and gnashing of teeth from Aquilani, Fat Al et al). Astonishingly I pretty much agree. Rooney as a lone striker in international football is a worry, he will not get a constant steam of decent ball as is usually the case at United so how long before he gets frustrated and starts playing up, either by 'losing his rag' or dropping back to chase for the ball. Both scenarios would be disastrous for England. As for our wide men, I really can not see any of them getting much joy from international defenders, none have them have had a particularly good season, I can see Walcott or Lennon maybe getting some joy from the bench but that is about all. Much as I hate to say it, I see England getting most joy from the Rooney/Heskey pairing, it might not be pretty but it just might work. Play as a solid 4-4-2 or just maybe as a 4-3-2-1 with Gerrard and Rooney supporting, Barry (or Parker) holding and the fullbacks given licence to get forward. Ok, it's very English in style and maybe a bit primitive, (actually very primitive) but if we try and take on the better countries at a passing game we will lose. Assuming the weather is cool, as expected, an aggressive all action game might, for once, be the right approach.
TrickyTrev Posted 24 May 2010 Posted 24 May 2010 James G Johnson Terry Ferdinand A Cole Lennon Lampard Gerrard A Johnson Rooney Crouch Would love Capello to pick that, especially that midfield with 2 of the best central players and 2 exciting wingers. I just hope he doesn't start to dick around with the formation as the press seem to think he might, it's too late for that now. Surely the only extended period of time he has with the players on the training pitch is exactly the time to work on team shape and structure i.e. 'dicking around with the formation.' I hope that we do not play in any one single way through out the tournament. The two most talented teams in the tournament, Spain and Brazil, both play with a high line and attacking full backs, they are asking to be hit on the counter attack. The unlikely Yanks have already shown the way to beat both sides, invite them to commit to many men forward and attack the space behind the absent full backs. I'd play 4-3-3 cum 4-5-1 against these sides with Johnson and Walcott out wide. Hart Carragher Terry Ferdinand Cole Lampard Barry Gerrard Walcott Rooney Johnson However, in most games that England play the opposition will be sat back and try and defend deep. We are going to need more guile against such opposition and I'd be inclined to have Rooney in the number 10 role behind another forward with Gerrard coming in from the left. Essentially setting us up in the same way we did in the qualifiers with the only tweak being G Johnson providing the width on the right over lapping the incutting A Johnson. Attacking full backs work best when they are backing up inverted footed wingers and we will have more threat if we have players from both wings prepared to drift into the centre. Hart G Johnson Terry Ferdinand Cole Lampard Barry A Johnson W Rooney S Gerrard Crouch
TrickyTrev Posted 24 May 2010 Posted 24 May 2010 Word out on Scum Street is that Fabio is toying with Rooney as a lone front man, with Lennon and Walcott as the fleet footed flankers and with Gerrard acting as the midfield prompter. Well, whilst I can't argue with the personel, I can't say that I care much for the system(s). Looks to me like Capello is trying to hybridise two seemingly successful (but possibly mutually exclusive) red shite strategies. In red shite Mark I, Walcott & Lennon substitute for Valencia & Nani - cue lots of outswingers to Roo from wide positions. It's an interesting idea and it clearly worked for Manure for half a dozen games or so until Wazzer's knackers gave out. But you don't have to be Einstein to realize that sitting deep with two banks of four against wingers works rather like infantry in square formation against cavalry (they shall not pass). In red shite Mark II, Rooney substitutes for Torres. Now that really is Wayne's World thinking, except that I doubt that the modest Scouse Manc has ever dreamt that he's in the same league as a finisher as El Nino. Don't get me wrong, I can see how this set-up could work ...well in theory at least, based on last night's CL Final. There's a lot about Rooney that reminds me of Diego Milito (and/or the other way round). They're both visionary, agressive, power players blessed with technical qualities who instinctively play the one touch game. Rooney is perhaps better off the ball but Milito is the more natural finisher who can fashion his own chances and, for me, that gives him the edge - you can dominate territory and possession as much as you like (or do a total lock down and throw away the key a la Mourinho) but it don't mean a thing it you ain't shootin' in... Much as I respect the Roo I'm not sure now (as opposed to five years ago) that if he actually found himself in the same positions as Milito last night whether he would replicate his successes (cue grammar free, knee jerk wailing and gnashing of teeth from Aquilani, Fat Al et al). I think Rooney has already done a pretty good El Nino impression this season, I am thinking in particular of the game at Arsenal where Nani was so outstanding. Rooney showed the athleticism and awareness necessary to be an outstanding counter attacking lone striker. I would not be surprised, or dissapointed, if Capello was preparing England to impersonate Liverpool of 2008/2009. If one is dubious about the quality of our wingers when not given large amounts of space it makes sense to use them as Rafa does, wing backs in front of full backs who only pounce forward on the counter, luring the opposition full backs forward. It would also be a delight to see Steve Gerrard's uniquely English interpretation of the trequartista role back in full flow. He is at his best when the threat of the power in his boots draws defenders out to close him down and he instead charges past them with that same power utilized for direct dribbling.
marbelladave Posted 24 May 2010 Posted 24 May 2010 We could of course try the 'confuse the hell out of the opposition' approach. 4-4-2 with Cole and Cole down the left and Johnson and Johnson down the right...
Webbo Posted 24 May 2010 Posted 24 May 2010 We could of course try the 'confuse the hell out of the opposition' approach. 4-4-2 with Cole and Cole down the left and Johnson and Johnson down the right... They make great baby powder.
marbelladave Posted 24 May 2010 Posted 24 May 2010 They make great baby powder. And Baby oil! Get the opposition bastards thinking about sex, that'll do it!
Fosse Fox Posted 25 May 2010 Author Posted 25 May 2010 I think Rooney has already done a pretty good El Nino impression this season, I am thinking in particular of the game at Arsenal where Nani was so outstanding. Rooney showed the athleticism and awareness necessary to be an outstanding counter attacking lone striker. I would not be surprised, or dissapointed, if Capello was preparing England to impersonate Liverpool of 2008/2009. If one is dubious about the quality of our wingers when not given large amounts of space it makes sense to use them as Rafa does, wing backs in front of full backs who only pounce forward on the counter, luring the opposition full backs forward. It would also be a delight to see Steve Gerrard's uniquely English interpretation of the trequartista role back in full flow. He is at his best when the threat of the power in his boots draws defenders out to close him down and he instead charges past them with that same power utilized for direct dribbling. A fair riposte to the last hypothetical sentence of my last post: Much as I respect the Roo I'm not sure now (as opposed to five years ago) that if he actually found himself in the same positions as Milito last night whether he would replicate his successes. You might recall Milito's second goal in the CL Final where he received the ball on the left flank and ran towards the opposing area where he checked, turned the defender and shot low into the corner. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPkJqGFjJVY You might also recall that rather spookily in the 23rd minute of last night's game Rooney received the ball out wide left near the half way line, flicked the ball past his opponent and bore down on goal . Once inside the area confronted by two defenders Rooney hesitated and was immediately dispossessed - he did not have the instinct to improvise or just cut in to get a shot away (this incident was replayed on ITV coverage). Consequently it is with a heavy heart that I am forced to conclude that Rooney is not in Milito's class.
TrickyTrev Posted 25 May 2010 Posted 25 May 2010 A fair riposte to the last hypothetical sentence of my last post: Much as I respect the Roo I'm not sure now (as opposed to five years ago) that if he actually found himself in the same positions as Milito last night whether he would replicate his successes. You might recall Milito's second goal in the CL Final where he received the ball on the left flank and ran towards the opposing area where he checked, turned the defender and shot low into the corner. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPkJqGFjJVY You might also recall that rather spookily in the 23rd minute of last night's game Rooney received the ball out wide left near the half way line, flicked the ball past his opponent and bore down on goal . Once inside the area confronted by two defenders Rooney hesitated and was immediately dispossessed - he did not have the instinct to improvise or just cut in to get a shot away (this incident was replayed on ITV coverage). Consequently it is with a heavy heart that I am forced to conclude that Rooney is not in Milito's class. Which of these methods is a sensible method of analysis and which is clearly a charade designed to give faux legitimacy to a position you have decided to champion? When comparing and contrasting players one should... 1) Consider their respective attributes and body of work as a whole (giving more weight to recent performance) or... 2) Arbitrarily pick two isolated 'plays' and use this as your entire basis for comparison
marbelladave Posted 25 May 2010 Posted 25 May 2010 Which of these methods is a sensible method of analysis and which is clearly a charade designed to give faux legitimacy to a position you have decided to champion? When comparing and contrasting players one should... 1) Consider their respective attributes and body of work as a whole (giving more weight to recent performance) or... 2) Arbitrarily pick two isolated 'plays' and use this as your entire basis for comparison or 3... Point out that one of the players is some way short of match fitness which is perhaps why he was given such an extended run out last night. I have to admit that I think Rooney is generally over rated in England, but that said he is comfortably our most accomplished attacker. Despite this season at United I do not like the idea of Rooney leading the line in International football, he sees much less of the ball than he does when playing for his (usually dominant) club and gets frustrated quickly at his lack of involvement. If Heskey has to play up top to give the attack some focus, then so be it. Support from Rooney in a 4-4-1-1 and if you want to get creative, Rooney and Gerrard in a 4-3-2-1, effectively the systems we used during qualification.
Fosse Fox Posted 25 May 2010 Author Posted 25 May 2010 Which of these methods is a sensible method of analysis and which is clearly a charade designed to give faux legitimacy to a position you have decided to champion? When comparing and contrasting players one should... 1) Consider their respective attributes and body of work as a whole (giving more weight to recent performance) or... 2) Arbitrarily pick two isolated 'plays' and use this as your entire basis for comparison My case studies are anything but arbitrary. You forget that I anticipated Rooney's failure and that the examples provided are culled from the two most recent performances of both players - the criteria by which you set such great store. Much of this however is by the bye... Rooney may not be in Milito's class as a finisher and therefore not equipped to play the role of the lone front man but he does own other qualities in abundance that would make him indispensable in an advanced midfield position or possibly as the foil for the out and out striker - his vision and his instinctive first time passing (commodities so precious and rare in the English game that they are all but invisible to the naked eyes of our registered blind pundits). Unfortunately if placed in the more withdrawn role he might find himself treading on the toes of our national enigma, Steven Gerrard. The man best equipped to play the lone front man/out and out striker is Jermaine Defoe but injuries and scandal have led to an alarming drop in his recent form. So we have a problem. And, going by last nights lack lustre display, that is just one amongst several others. All of this fuels my pessimism about what awaits unwary Albion in Group C. Isolated plays notwithstanding...
Uncle Albert Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 So Fosse Fox what are your excuses for the following points, Algeria having their best player injured who plays for Lazio and will miss the the England game and the USA losing 4-2 to Czech Republic last night?
purpleronnie Posted 26 May 2010 Posted 26 May 2010 That USA result makes me more confident although not sure how much you can gauge from that, their game against us is being heralded as the biggest game they've ever played so its a little different to a friendly but they still lost.
Fosse Fox Posted 26 May 2010 Author Posted 26 May 2010 So Fosse Fox what are your excuses for the following points, Algeria having their best player injured who plays for Lazio and will miss the the England game and the USA losing 4-2 to Czech Republic last night? As usual Aquilani, you don't make much sense - your first query is a non sequitur ('excuses - injured'). Of course, the main purpose of your questions is to rub in a little of the old schadenfreude - but I'll humour you. Meghni has been a doubt for some time for the finals and I would think that England's chances of victory against Algeria would be slightly increased if he did not appear in this match. England can also draw some comfort from the USA's home loss to the Czech Republic but the reports that I have read suggest that Bradley put out largely a second string side. Perhaps though, one could see this as an 'excuse' as the coach does not seem to know what his first XI is.On the flip side, the Algerians, Yanks and Slovenes could draw some comfort from England's abject display at home to Mexico - a side that could be seen as the median of our Group C opposition. If i were you Uncle Aquilani I'd show a little more respect for our World Cup opponents - you've made an awfully thick rod for your back if things were to go awry...
purpleronnie Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 Yep the USA had 4 of their best players out and a few others, plus it was a friendly.
Manwell Pablo Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 Yep the USA had 4 of their best players out and a few others, plus it was a friendly. Whilst I agree with FF about the standard of opposition in our group not being as low as some people think. That's hardly an excuse, the side that lined up against Mexico wont be the side that lines up against the USA, and we won 3-1. Plus the Czech's are garbage. and I wouldn't say Mexico are a "median" in our group either, I'd be far more worried about them then any of the other teams in our group. They have more class, pedigree and experince than any of our opponents and have an excellent manager to boot who has got them playing in the right way. Undeafted in 10 international games before playing us at Wembley, I'd say it was a very good win, given we didn't even go full strength, yes there were some not so great moments from certain players but hopefully they will be back up or left at home.
Fosse Fox Posted 27 May 2010 Author Posted 27 May 2010 Whilst I agree with FF about the standard of opposition in our group not being as low as some people think. That's hardly an excuse, the side that lined up against Mexico wont be the side that lines up against the USA, and we won 3-1. Plus the Czech's are garbage. and I wouldn't say Mexico are a "median" in our group either, I'd be far more worried about them then any of the other teams in our group. They have more class, pedigree and experince than any of our opponents and have an excellent manager to boot who has got them playing in the right way. Undeafted in 10 international games before playing us at Wembley, I'd say it was a very good win, given we didn't even go full strength, yes there were some not so great moments from certain players but hopefully they will be back up or left at home. You tag Ronnie but dis me - rather like an 'evening only' invite to a wedding. Some might argue that Mexico fall below the median of our Group C opposition in that they flatter to deceive and that their inflated FIFA standing has been earned mainly against the mighty minnows of CONCACAF. Technically, Mexico are a better side than, say, the USA, but I would rather face the flairy Lation's than the stolid Yankees on June 11th for all sorts of Colemanballs reasons. Mexico are probably a better side than Algeria but I think Slovenia would be more than they could chew. The Slovenes are almost as technical, better defensively, physically stronger (deep voices, beefy bollocks etc) and play regularly against higher ranking European opposition. As for the merits of Englands performance against Mexico, I don't think you should bring out the old 'under strength' chestnut. Remember, it was the very second string King & Crouch show that gave us a very undeserved and controversial half time lead. In all probability, things might have been a damn sight worse with the static shoo ins Terry, Barry and Lampard on the pitch. In fact, probably as bad as they were for large parts of the encounters with Egypt and Slovenia. Just as well we play the well below median Slovenes when Group C is done and dusted (he said ominously)...
FoxyPV Posted 27 May 2010 Posted 27 May 2010 Don't worry Crouch will score a hattrick against all the shit teams and then fire blanks the rest of the tournament.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.