Pride_Of_The_Midlands Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 because your own side is ****ing dreadful and always has been. Wales are ****ing shite.
Corky Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Doesn't help at all that Pearce is their manager. Agreed, don't rate the bloke at all. Needs freshening up at the coaching level of the u21's.
Dan Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 There are already U17 and U19 tournaments and most nations don't use their senior internationals, there's no real prestige so they're only cheating themselves from a chance to bleed good youth if they play established players. You ban senior caps and then you can't let players who've had a small bite at full internationals play and why do that? Insigne, for example, may have a senior cap but he's clearly still a fringe player who will benefit from this tournament. I don't see the problem, other than bitterness because your own side is ****ing dreadful and always has been. We nearly knocked you out of qualifying a couple of years ago when Ramsey was U21. Christ. How am I in any way bitter to Italy? OK then, I'll make a slight edit to that. I'd ban any player from it who has had over 5 caps at first team level. The majority of that post appears to be aimed at someone who was bigging up England.
Guest MattP Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 because your own side is ****ing dreadful and always has been. Behave yourself, we have only been shit for the last 15 years or so, before that we have always been considered one of the Worlds top sides and no one can ever take away the fact we have won the big one, something some countries can only ever dream of doing.
Finnegan Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Behave yourself, we have only been shit for the last 15 years or so, before that we have always been considered one of the Worlds top sides and no one can ever take away the fact we have won the big one, something some countries can only ever dream of doing. Wait, what? We're talking about U21s here. Calm down.
Manwell Pablo Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Yeah he's right I can never remember a decent England U21 side
Guest MattP Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Wait, what? We're talking about U21s here. Calm down. Even harsher then. The Under 21's have won 2 European Championships and got to the final just 4 years back.
purpleronnie Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 If memory serves me right we were a very good side in the 80's.
Finnegan Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Even harsher then. The Under 21's have won 2 European Championships and got to the final just 4 years back. shut up, you won it a couple of times in the eighties then went about twenty years without qualifying. (Bit of an exaggeration perhaps but not far off.) You've taken it a bit more seriously in the last few years (neglecting to mention you got hammered 4 - 0 in that final.) I appreciate its because you largely don't invest anything in your U21s and largely don't give a shit (come on, Taylor and Peace?) but that was essentially my point to begin with.
Guest MattP Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Just answering the point we have always been awful.
Aleksz Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Behave, Ince, Redmond etc are well at their level in the champ. If they got bought by prem clubs they'd only be loaned straight back. You're telling me Tom Ince signs for a Swansea or Norwich tomorrow, he's back on loan in the championship next year? Behave. Zaha will play premier league football next year as will Butland, probably Ince, arguably Chalobah and Dawson too. If Redmond keeps playing like he did last night and he will be at a Norwich, Cardiff or Sunderland too.
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Simple fact it at pretty much all levels we are just a bit better than average. Qualifying for most competitions, getting to last 8 (ish). Meaning we are in the top 10 or so teams in the world which is just about right. That aside though we have pretty much always been awful to watch. When we won the world cup in 66 we stumbled across a team/formation that worked and were fortunate to have Banks, Charlton and Moore in our side who at the time were world class. In 1990 we limped out of a pretty poor group and should have lost to Cameroon. In 1996 we played some pretty decent stuff at times and had Gascoigne and Shearer at pretty much there peaks. On the whole though we churn out pretty poor stuff to watch and always have.
Super_horns Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Didn't the 1966 World cup start with 2 0-0 draws before a 2-0 win...
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Didn't the 1966 World cup start with 2 0-0 draws before a 2-0 win... I don't get your point? It wasn't until the quarter finals that Ball, Peters and Hurst were all playing together.....
Super_horns Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 I don't get your point? It wasn't until the quarter finals that Ball, Peters and Hurst were all playing together..... Just adding to your point that we started slowly before as you say making the changes that went on to bring success. If we drew 2 games 0-0 now it would be "send them home in disgrace.."
Guest ttfn Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 The most frustrating thing about Pearce is his team selection. Lowe is this year's Mancienne, inexplicably picked ahead of far more talented footballers sitting on the bench.
Dan Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Simple fact it at pretty much all levels we are just a bit better than average. Qualifying for most competitions, getting to last 8 (ish). Meaning we are in the top 10 or so teams in the world which is just about right. That aside though we have pretty much always been awful to watch. When we won the world cup in 66 we stumbled across a team/formation that worked and were fortunate to have Banks, Charlton and Moore in our side who at the time were world class. In 1990 we limped out of a pretty poor group and should have lost to Cameroon. In 1996 we played some pretty decent stuff at times and had Gascoigne and Shearer at pretty much there peaks. On the whole though we churn out pretty poor stuff to watch and always have. Being average I can accept, being average when we so often show we can be better I cannot. For the prestige of the Premier League, the national side is an utter bag of wank and probably the worst out there if you compare it to the top league (although I think the PL is over-rated too).
ScouseFox Posted 6 June 2013 Posted 6 June 2013 Who even is Lowe? Who does he play for? What the hell was he doing for 95% of last night's game?
FrankieWorthoYaggedMyWife Posted 7 June 2013 Posted 7 June 2013 Being average I can accept, being average when we so often show we can be better I cannot. For the prestige of the Premier League, the national side is an utter bag of wank and probably the worst out there if you compare it to the top league (although I think the PL is over-rated too). I don't think the league is over-rated as such. I don't think anyone would claim it is the most technical league. Its extremely fast and physical in comparison to the rest of the world which makes it a good spectacle, hence the massive interest around the world. I read a piece recently calling for the league cup to have its rules amended forcing teams to field 12 "British" players in a match day squad. This obviously throws up its own issues but something radical like that may be required?
Danno Posted 8 June 2013 Posted 8 June 2013 What's the deal with Zaha and Ince? I know Ince is suspended when will he be back?
Jimothy Posted 8 June 2013 Posted 8 June 2013 Just seen the England team for tonight's game v Norway. Chalobah is back, but Lowe still starts! Rose back at left back too. But it's the front three I don't get. Redmond, Zaha and Ince. Surely these are all wingers, there's no actual out and out striker there, in a game we need to win!
Guest shearfox Posted 8 June 2013 Posted 8 June 2013 Just seen the England team for tonight's game v Norway. Chalobah is back, but Lowe still starts! Rose back at left back too. But it's the front three I don't get. Redmond, Zaha and Ince. Surely these are all wingers, there's no actual out and out striker there, in a game we need to win! We are lacking in strikers , but still they are capable of getting goals. Reminds me of the French side in 98'
Jimothy Posted 8 June 2013 Posted 8 June 2013 We are lacking in strikers , but still they are capable of getting goals. Reminds me of the French side in 98' Still think we'd be better starting with someone like Wickham, even if he is shite, rather than play 3 players who are all going to drop deep or go wide to get the ball. Can see us getting a lot of the balls into the box and nobody being there to finish it.
marko Posted 8 June 2013 Posted 8 June 2013 1-0 down. Terrible defending from the set-piece and second phase. Made our defending against set-pieces look competent.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.