Ambitious Much?

[The Year Of The Fox]

We'd have a way better top flight.

 

If a club like ourselves gets promoted, what do we aim for? A few domestic trophies, possibly Europe. Then what? We'll never win the league because the league is dominated by money. The top 4/5/6 are way ahead of any other team because of their investment.

 

Survival is a great achievement because of this.

 

Brian Clough said that the Premier League would ruin football. Yet again, he was right.

But you dont need to be in the prem to win a cup (and therefore europe) so half your incentives are irrelevant.

[The Horse's Mouth]

You can't polish a turd.

[The Year Of The Fox]

Whilst I agree with the general point that there are a lot of foreigners doing little more than some Prem academy and top-end Championship players could do, you're either too young, too ignorant or too forgetful to remember that there have been a lot of average foreigners in the Premier League since its inception, at least as a percentage of the amount of foreigners involved.

The likes of Jan Aage Fjortoft, Stig Inge Bjornebe and Oyvind Leonhardsen were hardly world beaters (sorry to any Norwegians!)

Maybe too forgetful. Were the players that bad? Bjornebe played for Liverpool, wasn't Fjortoft influential for (i wanna say Swindon)

I'm gonna look into this when home, take a team at random preferably who were in the prem then (96) and now.

The %'s given in terms of overseas players then and now is astonishing. It's frustrating cos to me its so obvious as to whats wrong.

[AdamN]

Before blaming the money that the Premier League has brought into the game, has anyone ever considered that the England national team has just simply never been that good? Our best World Cup finishes are winning it in 1966 (close enough to 50 years ago now) and 4th in 1990. Even in the Euros we've only ever managed to finish third. It hardly screams of a team with fantastic international pedigree that has been 'ruined' by Sky and an influx of foreign talent.

[Guest shearfox]

Before blaming the money that the Premier League has brought into the game, has anyone ever considered that the England national team has just simply never been that good? Our best World Cup finishes are winning it in 1966 (close enough to 50 years ago now) and 4th in 1990. Even in the Euros we've only ever managed to finish third. It hardly screams of a team with fantastic international pedigree that has been 'ruined' by Sky and an influx of foreign talent.

It is more to do with how we are bringing young players through, we go for the big strong lads while the more smaller technically gifted players find it difficult..

[rico]

i blame Wellens

[Guest MattP]

Before blaming the money that the Premier League has brought into the game, has anyone ever considered that the England national team has just simply never been that good? Our best World Cup finishes are winning it in 1966 (close enough to 50 years ago now) and 4th in 1990. Even in the Euros we've only ever managed to finish third. It hardly screams of a team with fantastic international pedigree that has been 'ruined' by Sky and an influx of foreign talent.

 

It was a lot harder back then though as well. The whole world wasn't playing so it wasn't uncommon to be drawn in an opening group along the lines of Holland, Brazil and East Germany.

 

It should be easier to progress now givin the amount of cack Asian and African sides that go through and we are getting worse. Instead of fairly strong World teams like Paraguay, Colombia, and the old USSR etc going there all the time you now have Togo, Mali, Iran etc turning up.

 

Turkey and Korea have got to semi-finals in recent years.

 

We aren't that good no apart from 1966, 1970, 1986 and 1990 but we sure shouldn't be sat their struggling to qualify now when FIFA allocates 32 teams to the competition.

[AdamN]

It was a lot harder back then though as well. The whole world wasn't playing so it wasn't uncommon to be drawn in an opening group along the lines of Holland, Brazil and East Germany.

 

It should be easier to progress now givin the amount of cack Asian and African sides that go through and we are getting worse. Instead of fairly strong World teams like Paraguay, Colombia, and the old USSR etc going there all the time you now have Togo, Mali, Iran etc turning up.

 

Turkey and Korea have got to semi-finals in recent years.

 

We aren't that good no apart from 1966, 1970, 1986 and 1990 but we sure shouldn't be sat their struggling to qualify now when FIFA allocates 32 teams to the competition.

 

I agree, but I think it shows that our failure to do well on the international stage can't simply be attributed to a richer/more international domestic league, because we were hardly world beaters pre-1992. I also agree with your post about the fact that most of the youngsters in this country are trained by blokes whose idea of a decent player is someone who isn't afraid to get 'stuck in' - a mentality that hasn't changed for decades. Until we see grassroot changes that involve focusing on and developing kids with genuine footballing talent, then we're never going to be producing scores of world class players, in the same way that the likes of Spain and Germany are.

 

Perhaps England aren't getting worse, but the other teams are just getting better?

[Guest MattP]

I agree, but I think it shows that our failure to do well on the international stage can't simply be attributed to a richer/more international domestic league, because we were hardly world beaters pre-1992. I also agree with your post about the fact that most of the youngsters in this country are trained by blokes whose idea of a decent player is someone who isn't afraid to get 'stuck in' - a mentality that hasn't changed for decades. Until we see grassroot changes that involve focusing on and developing kids with genuine footballing talent, then we're never going to be producing scores of world class players, in the same way that the likes of Spain and Germany are.

 

Perhaps England aren't getting worse, but the other teams are just getting better?

 

That's a very good point, a lot of our coaching techniques and ideas are probably still the same whereas they have moved on in football.

 

We still have people like Barry Fry and Howard Wilkinson working within our game, it's well past it's sell by date.

[The Year Of The Fox]

Liverpool's Squad 96/97

 

 

 

Tony Warner  Goalkeeper  11/05/1974 England  01/01/1994 David James  Goalkeeper  01/08/1970 England  06/07/1992 Rob Jones  Defender  05/11/1971 England  04/10/1991 John Scales  Defender  04/07/1966 England  02/09/1994 Steve Harkness  Defender  27/08/1971 England  17/07/1989 Bjorn Tore Kvarme  Defender  17/06/1972 Norway  01/01/1997 Jamie Carragher  Defender  28/01/1978 England  01/08/1994 Neil Ruddock  Defender  09/05/1968 England  22/07/1993 Stig Inge Bjornebye  Defender  11/12/1969 Norway  18/12/1992 Phil Babb  Defender  30/11/1970 Rep of Ireland  01/09/1994 Mark Wright  Defender  01/08/1963 England  15/07/1991 Dominic Matteo  Defender  24/04/1974 Scotland  27/05/1992 Mark Kennedy  Midfield  15/05/1976 Rep of Ireland  21/03/1995 Jamie Redknapp  Midfield  25/06/1973 England  15/01/1991 Jamie Cassidy  Midfield  21/11/1977 England  01/08/1996 Patrik Berger  Midfield  10/11/1973 Czech Republic  15/08/1996 David Thompson  Midfield  12/09/1977 England  08/11/1994 Michael Thomas  Midfield  24/08/1967 England  16/12/1991 John Barnes  Midfield  07/11/1963 England  19/06/1987 Steve McManaman  Midfield  11/02/1972 England  19/02/1990 Jason McAteer  Midfield  18/06/1971 Rep of Ireland  06/09/1995 Michael Owen  Forward  14/12/1979 England  18/12/1996 Robbie Fowler  Forward  09/04/1975 England  23/04/1992 Stan Collymore  Forward  22/01/1971 England  03/07/1995 Lee Jones  Forward  29/05/1973 Wales  12/03/1992

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

Walcott never seems to have filled his potential.

 

Erm - bit early to write the lad off if you actually give him a watch and don't just listen to the guff churners on MOTD bemoaning his 'lack of end product.' He's only 24, scored 20+ goals last season in all competitions (averaging just shy of a goal a game) primarily from the wing, and managed 14 assists. As said, he's only 24 so theoretically should be approaching his peak years.

 

If he wasn't English we'd be waxing lyrical over stats like that. Walcott is one of the players I think could be genuinely frightening for England if used properly. 

[Guest ttfn]

Liverpool's Squad 96/97

Tony Warner Goalkeeper 11/05/1974 England 01/01/1994 David James Goalkeeper 01/08/1970 England 06/07/1992 Rob Jones Defender 05/11/1971 England 04/10/1991 John Scales Defender 04/07/1966 England 02/09/1994 Steve Harkness Defender 27/08/1971 England 17/07/1989 Bjorn Tore Kvarme Defender 17/06/1972 Norway 01/01/1997 Jamie Carragher Defender 28/01/1978 England 01/08/1994 Neil Ruddock Defender 09/05/1968 England 22/07/1993 Stig Inge Bjornebye Defender 11/12/1969 Norway 18/12/1992 Phil Babb Defender 30/11/1970 Rep of Ireland 01/09/1994 Mark Wright Defender 01/08/1963 England 15/07/1991 Dominic Matteo Defender 24/04/1974 Scotland 27/05/1992 Mark Kennedy Midfield 15/05/1976 Rep of Ireland 21/03/1995 Jamie Redknapp Midfield 25/06/1973 England 15/01/1991 Jamie Cassidy Midfield 21/11/1977 England 01/08/1996 Patrik Berger Midfield 10/11/1973 Czech Republic 15/08/1996 David Thompson Midfield 12/09/1977 England 08/11/1994 Michael Thomas Midfield 24/08/1967 England 16/12/1991 John Barnes Midfield 07/11/1963 England 19/06/1987 Steve McManaman Midfield 11/02/1972 England 19/02/1990 Jason McAteer Midfield 18/06/1971 Rep of Ireland 06/09/1995 Michael Owen Forward 14/12/1979 England 18/12/1996 Robbie Fowler Forward 09/04/1975 England 23/04/1992 Stan Collymore Forward 22/01/1971 England 03/07/1995 Lee Jones Forward 29/05/1973 Wales 12/03/1992

I'm not disputing that there were far, far fewer foreigners, more that those who were in the Prem weren't all world-beaters.

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

Let's not forget that Ali Dia played in the Premier League in the mid-nineties, halcyon days for foreign players in our game. Vision, skill, touch - all in abundance.

[The Year Of The Fox]

I'm not disputing that there were far, far fewer foreigners, more that those who were in the Prem weren't all world-beaters.

I can't post their squad from last season for some reason. No, maybe 'world class' was far too a strong word to have used when referring to back then. I was thinking the likes of Cantona Zola etc. You also had much better Welsh and Scottish players, Rush, Giggs, Hughes, McClair

[Guest ttfn]

I can't post their squad from last season for some reason. No, maybe 'world class' was far too a strong word to have used when referring to back then. I was thinking the likes of Cantona Zola etc. You also had much better Welsh and Scottish players, Rush, Giggs, Hughes, McClair

By that point Rush, McClair and Hughes were all really getting on, but I take the point.

But when you look at who the non-British/Irish players are in 1996/7, the list isn't too impressive.

 

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/premier-league/gastarbeiter/wettbewerb_GB1_1996.html

 

16 Norwegians, months after not qualifying for Euro 96.

 

14 Dutch, of whom really only Bergkamp and an ageing Gullit stand out.

 

The list of Italians is genuinely quite impressive, but I wonder if, given the way that the game has changed in this country since the foreign influx, they'd have quite the same impact now? I mean, was Benito Carbone really a good player? Or do we just remember him fondly because he was a bit different.

I heard somebody recently talking about Cantona, saying that the reason he was so successful in the Premier League but not in Europe is that he played between the opposition's midfield and defence, which is something that had gone out of the English game during the ban from Europe after Heysel. In the Champions League teams just man-marked him and he wasn't able to be such an overwhelming influence...

[The Year Of The Fox]

By that point Rush, McClair and Hughes were all really getting on, but I take the point.

But when you look at who the non-British/Irish players are in 1996/7, the list isn't too impressive.

 

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/premier-league/gastarbeiter/wettbewerb_GB1_1996.html

 

16 Norwegians, months after not qualifying for Euro 96.

 

14 Dutch, of whom really only Bergkamp and an ageing Gullit stand out.

 

The list of Italians is genuinely quite impressive, but I wonder if, given the way that the game has changed in this country since the foreign influx, they'd have quite the same impact now? I mean, was Benito Carbone really a good player? Or do we just remember him fondly because he was a bit different.

I heard somebody recently talking about Cantona, saying that the reason he was so successful in the Premier League but not in Europe is that he played between the opposition's midfield and defence, which is something that had gone out of the English game during the ban from Europe after Heysel. In the Champions League teams just man-marked him and he wasn't able to be such an overwhelming influence...

Norway though actually had some very good players in that list. Johnsen, Berg and OGS all played for Man Utd and OGS became probably one of the best strikers in the league (and my favourite) Iversen had a good stint at Spurs.

Decent website that. Will look at the Dutch later

[Dan]

We'd have a way better top flight.

 

If a club like ourselves gets promoted, what do we aim for? A few domestic trophies, possibly Europe. Then what? We'll never win the league because the league is dominated by money. The top 4/5/6 are way ahead of any other team because of their investment.

 

Survival is a great achievement because of this.

 

Brian Clough said that the Premier League would ruin football. Yet again, he was right.

 

Our top flight has all of the praise, all of the hype and this 'best league in the world' tag, but it really is so unjustified it's untrue.

 

The Premier League is poison for European football. It's by far the most powerful league in the world and the only way Premier League clubs recover from weak seasons (like last year) is by poaching all of the talent over Europe, rather than focus on how the other countries produced such better players.

 

Clubs will always favour the short-term approach because they have the money to but I really do think the lack of character, identity and continuity at most Premier League clubs is sad and does anything other than suggest it is 'the best league in the world'.

 

If we ever go up I'd want to emulate Swansea.

[Dan]

Before blaming the money that the Premier League has brought into the game, has anyone ever considered that the England national team has just simply never been that good? Our best World Cup finishes are winning it in 1966 (close enough to 50 years ago now) and 4th in 1990. Even in the Euros we've only ever managed to finish third. It hardly screams of a team with fantastic international pedigree that has been 'ruined' by Sky and an influx of foreign talent.

 

But England CAN be better. England are without a doubt the under-achievers of international football globally. The interest in football in England is as great as any country in the world - it's almost in our culture. For a country with England's population and passion for the game, how the hell have we been this bad historically?

 

The easiest comparisons are to countries in our region, western Europe, such as Spain, Italy, Germany & France. There are population differences but none really significant - and does anyone see us being better than these?

 

France are the other recent under-achievers and make no mistake, I don't envy their current situation, but they've got far more quality coming through than we have and you'll see it in the next five years.

 

Italy are very under-rated. Proper tournament team and some of the talent coming through looks phenomenal, they'll continue to be one of the powerhouses of international football. Spain & Germany don't even need a description.

 

All four of those are sides England SHOULD compete with. I'm not saying we have historically, but for the interest we have and the population, it's absolutely criminal how far behind those sides we are.

[Donut]

1. If foreign players are the reason our national team underperforms, why wasnt the national team sweeping everyone aside in the years between 66 and the influx of foreign players? 1 world cup and a couple of semi-finals in the history of the national game suggests we arent a major nation on the international scene, foreigners or not

 

2. The relationship between national team strength and the players that make the league up is dubious at best considering in recent times Spain have shown a large proportion of home based players in their national team, whilst Brazil export a large majority of their most talented players to richer worldwide leagues, therefore illustrating the point that good players will play, irrespective of the home league set up or who is playing in it. Cream rises to the top and it doesnt matter WHERE

 

3. How does the logic that suggests having MORE english players in the top flight would make our national team better? It might give us more international players in a broad sense and more depth but only those of true international class will improve the international team which is what we have now and loading up on Connor Wickham's and Andre Wisdom's is a largely pointless excersise. The best English players still play for the national side. They play club football too. A significant proportion of English players would be shite on the international stage, there would just be more of them.

 

4. It would be a self defeating cycle to make the Premiership a less marketable product by taking away foreign players and reducing the potential viewership levels of the league, then reducing revenues to even develop some decent players in the first place and run the England team further down.

 

 

The problem with the England team is very simple: WE are WORSE at football than some other countries.

 

 

Thats it, thats all you have to say. No amount of setting targets and hot air changes that.

[Jimothy]

1. If foreign players are the reason our national team underperforms, why wasnt the national team sweeping everyone aside in the years between 66 and the influx of foreign players? 1 world cup and a couple of semi-finals in the history of the national game suggests we arent a major nation on the international scene, foreigners or not

 

2. The relationship between national team strength and the players that make the league up is dubious at best considering in recent times Spain have shown a large proportion of home based players in their national team, whilst Brazil export a large majority of their most talented players to richer worldwide leagues, therefore illustrating the point that good players will play, irrespective of the home league set up or who is playing in it. Cream rises to the top and it doesnt matter WHERE

 

3. How does the logic that suggests having MORE english players in the top flight would make our national team better? It might give us more international players in a broad sense and more depth but only those of true international class will improve the international team which is what we have now and loading up on Connor Wickham's and Andre Wisdom's is a largely pointless excersise. The best English players still play for the national side. They play club football too. A significant proportion of English players would be shite on the international stage, there would just be more of them.

 

4. It would be a self defeating cycle to make the Premiership a less marketable product by taking away foreign players and reducing the potential viewership levels of the league, then reducing revenues to even develop some decent players in the first place and run the England team further down.

 

 

The problem with the England team is very simple: WE are WORSE at football than some other countries.

 

 

Thats it, thats all you have to say. No amount of setting targets and hot air changes that.

Top post, absolutely spot on.

We just aren't good enough and quick fixes like quotas aren't the answer. If anything is ever going to improve, it needs to start right at the grassroots, but we need to patient, it's not going to solve things in a few years.

I've always found it funny, and Foxes Talk is a prime example at the moment as we have the two discussions running side by side, one minute you get pundits and sports writers saying we don't have enough English player in the Premier League and the next they are saying we play too much football in this country and need a winter break or a smaller Premier League. Both arguments can't be used, because if we don't have enough English players in the league, then the length or size of the league will have just as much an effect on other national teams as it will ours because of all the foreigners.

As Bilo says the cream rises to the top no matter where they play. It's not like managers are not playing English players out of spite or racism or something, they aren't playing them, because they aren't good enough. England won't win the World Cup because Man City start playing James Milner instead of David Silva, England will win the World Cup when they start producing David Silvas.

[MC Prussian]

Isn't it also a case of improved competition? When England was known as a powerhouse and the second heart of football (besides Scotland, where the game originates), there were only a handful or maybe two handful of great footballing nations.

Over the last couple of decades, the general quality of football has improved tenfold, the amount of excellent and talented footballers (with the rise of football around the world) has increased and more and more countries have upped their game.

 

England still has a good football team, but in relation to the world of football as of today, some FA representatives need to take a close look at themselves in the mirror and get off that high horse.

If the English squad would finally play as a TEAM and not just a collection of highly-skilled individuals, then they could go places again.

[Carl the Llama]

Frankly I think it has little to do with the Premier league and a lot to do with grassroots training as well as the ridiculous fees any decent homegrown players command.  Why would you take a chance on signing an Englishman when an equally talented player from abroad will set you back half as much or less?   But if other countries are able to produce strong national sides using players from all around the top leagues, not just their own or "the best league in the World", then the fact that we can't do the same implies that our league isn't the problem but the mentality of the coaches and recruiters.

[Dan]

1. If foreign players are the reason our national team underperforms, why wasnt the national team sweeping everyone aside in the years between 66 and the influx of foreign players? 1 world cup and a couple of semi-finals in the history of the national game suggests we arent a major nation on the international scene, foreigners or not

 

2. The relationship between national team strength and the players that make the league up is dubious at best considering in recent times Spain have shown a large proportion of home based players in their national team, whilst Brazil export a large majority of their most talented players to richer worldwide leagues, therefore illustrating the point that good players will play, irrespective of the home league set up or who is playing in it. Cream rises to the top and it doesnt matter WHERE

 

3. How does the logic that suggests having MORE english players in the top flight would make our national team better? It might give us more international players in a broad sense and more depth but only those of true international class will improve the international team which is what we have now and loading up on Connor Wickham's and Andre Wisdom's is a largely pointless excersise. The best English players still play for the national side. They play club football too. A significant proportion of English players would be shite on the international stage, there would just be more of them.

 

4. It would be a self defeating cycle to make the Premiership a less marketable product by taking away foreign players and reducing the potential viewership levels of the league, then reducing revenues to even develop some decent players in the first place and run the England team further down.

 

 

The problem with the England team is very simple: WE are WORSE at football than some other countries.

 

 

Thats it, thats all you have to say. No amount of setting targets and hot air changes that.

 

Can't argue with a lot of that.

 

Dare I say this though - I think the argument with foreign players is still a fair one and I don't think people are arguing that they've prevented us from being world beaters, people are arguing that the lack of English players will eventually see us drop even further. I really don't think this qualifying group is a fluke either. I genuinely think England are closer in terms of quality to your Polands and your Ukraines rather than Spain or Germany.

 

It's self inflicted though really. The number of foreigners in the Premier League is a disgrace but it's not the foreigners' fault, it's the English for producing a major lack of talent.

 

How a side of England's potential (and I'm not having anyone tell me there's no potential to be a world class side, because there certainly is) have got it so wrong is beyond me.

[Dan]

Top post, absolutely spot on.

We just aren't good enough and quick fixes like quotas aren't the answer. If anything is ever going to improve, it needs to start right at the grassroots, but we need to patient, it's not going to solve things in a few years.

I've always found it funny, and Foxes Talk is a prime example at the moment as we have the two discussions running side by side, one minute you get pundits and sports writers saying we don't have enough English player in the Premier League and the next they are saying we play too much football in this country and need a winter break or a smaller Premier League. Both arguments can't be used, because if we don't have enough English players in the league, then the length or size of the league will have just as much an effect on other national teams as it will ours because of all the foreigners.

As Bilo says the cream rises to the top no matter where they play. It's not like managers are not playing English players out of spite or racism or something, they aren't playing them, because they aren't good enough. England won't win the World Cup because Man City start playing James Milner instead of David Silva, England will win the World Cup when they start producing David Silvas.

 

Patience doesn't happen in English football. Everything about it is far too past-paced and short-term to ever really allow itself to develop. Only a handful of sides have an identifiable philosophy.

 

Loving that last line so well worded.

[Corky]

Robbie Savage was banging the drum for English football in the paper last week, saying that players who've played two good games at the start of the season (Barkley and Townsend) shouldn't just be called up.

 

Whilst, in the same article, wanting Fabian Delph to be selected. You see, there's the problem. Players who've played a couple of decent games at the start of the season being selected over players who've played a couple of decent games at the start of the season.

 

(I don't actually mind Savage's newspaper column, just thought it was highlighting the dearth of talent in the country).