Route 1 football - England's future?

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

Please tell me you are on the wind up, the widely regarded greatest nation in the World Brazil have only won 8 but we would have won 20? This despite not being able to win one European tournament that Greece have won recently?

 

Taking the piss out of Uruguays coaching? They must be doing something right if despite only having a population the size as Birmingham they have won 2 World Cups, 15 Copa's and got to the semis in the last World Cup whilst consistently producing World Class players over time.

 

The Copa America is a fantastic tournament btw, if you don't watch it you are really missing out. Top quality football played in the way any fans wants it to be.

 

Well Uruguay have 15 so it's not impossible that we would have 20.

 

The Euros is much harder to win than the Copa America btw.

 

Paraguay got to the final without winning a game 

[Guest MattP]

Yes, we would have beaten any team in the 1910s and 1920s.

 

We were probably still the best team in the world in the 1930s and 1940s.

 

 

So we were convieniently the best side in the world for four decades right at the exact same time we refused to play anybody else in the World or compete in major tournaments.

 

Just when we started to enter the World Cup's in the 50's (two first round eliminations) we obviously all of a sudden had become shite

 

Ever get the feeling we might have lost had we actually turned up given what has happened since?

 

Well Uruguay have 15 so it's not impossible that we would have 20.

 

The Euros is much harder to win than the Copa America btw.

 

If Brazil and Argentina couldn't get 15 we weren't going to.

 

The Copa is probably harder to actually win, Greece would NEVER have won a Copa, some of the sides like Chile, Colombia etc have had great sides over the years have been superb but you more than likely ended up bumping into the strongest side on the planet at the time with Brazil and Argentina in the tournament over time.

 

Replace Spain, Italy and Germany with Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay and I don't think our total of wins in the Euros would have changed too much from the zero is it now.

[Dan]

Yes I'm sure the highly-developed rich country that is Uruguay have a better coaching set-up than the richest football association in world football.

 

Happened to Casillas.

 

You strike me as the sort of person who'd judge a player on how much they cost rather than how good they are.

[MC Prussian]

We would have easily racked up the Copa Americas in the 1910s and 1920s.

The Copa really only started going in 1916, and England had the honour of playing against Wales, Ireland and Scotland for most part during the first 40 years before the 1920ies. Apart from the latter team, not a lot of competition at the time.

So, as for your claim. No, you wouldn't have.

[Dan]

I guess that they also have a better coaching set-up than Spain as well since they have more World Cups and Copa Americas.

 

Copa America 

 

If we were South American we would have 20 Copa Americas.

 

We'd be lucky to have 3. 20 Copa Americas? Has there even been that many?

[Dan]

I'm done with arguing with him. He's on a completely new level of bias. Never seen anything like this.

[MC Prussian]

Well Uruguay have 15 so it's not impossible that we would have 20.

The Euros is much harder to win than the Copa America btw.

Paraguay got to the final without winning a game

Any other extremes and exceptions you want to mention?

Despite only drawing, Paraguay still got to a final. Something England can only dream of.

And please let us all know why you think the Euros are harder to win than the Copa.

[MC Prussian]

We'd be lucky to have 3. 20 Copa Americas? Has there even been that many?

There must've been around 30 or 40 by now.

[Dan]

There must've been around 30 or 40 by now.

 

Shows what I know then. I thought they were every four years.

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

 

So we were convieniently the best side in the world for four decades right at the exact same time we refused to play anybody else in the World or compete in major tournaments.

 

Just when we started to enter the World Cup's in the 50's (two first round eliminations) we obviously all of a sudden had become shite

 

Ever get the feeling we might have lost had we actually turned up given what has happened since?

 

 

If Brazil and Argentina couldn't get 15 we weren't going to.

 

The Copa is probably harder to actually win, Greece would NEVER have won a Copa, some of the sides like Chile, Colombia etc have had great sides over the years have been superb but you more than likely ended up bumping into the strongest side on the planet at the time with Brazil and Argentina in the tournament over time.

 

Replace Spain, Italy and Germany with Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay and I don't think our total of wins in the Euros would have changed too much from the zero is it now.

 

you think that Paraguay could get to the final of the Euros 

 

Of course it's harder to win the Euros.

 

For a start you don't even have to qualify for the Copa America.

 

Then when you get there they have to invite teams just to make up the numbers.

 

China will be playing in it next year 

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

Any other extremes and exceptions you want to mention?

Despite only drawing, Paraguay still got to a final. Something England can only dream of.

And please let us all know why you think the Euros are harder to win than the Copa.

 

it's not exactly hard to get to the final of the Copa America.

 

There is more competition to win the Euros.

 

A team like Paraguay/Peru/Venezuela/Bolivia is guaranteed to make the quarter-finals.

 

They wouldn't even be able to qualify for the Euros.

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

Shows what I know then. I thought they were every four years.

 

They are but they used to be annual back in the early days.

 

Next year's Copa America is the 44th edition while Euro 2016 will only be the 15th edition.

 

So really it's not fair to compare number of Copa America wins to number of European Championship wins (unless you divide the Copa wins by 3)

[Guest MattP]

you think that Paraguay could get to the final of the Euros 

 

Of course it's harder to win the Euros.

 

For a start you don't even have to qualify for the Copa America.

 

Then when you get there they have to invite teams just to make up the numbers.

 

China will be playing in it next year 

 

Get to the final? They could win it, if Greece could win the tournament a couple of Paraguay's past sides could have done.

 

Qualification? Any side who could win either would walk through the process of qualifying for anything. Your arguments for invites and qualification are based on geograohical reasons anyway. Does the Euros have more depth? Of course it does, is it harder to win? I wouldn't say so givenonly once in the last 35 years (and they had a comp every two years a while back) only one side from outside the big three won it.

 

Chile have never won a Copa and they have pissed on England 2-0 on their last two visits to Wembley.

[Dan]

Good idea actually. Lets times England's number of Euros wins by 3 then to make it fairer.

[MC Prussian]

They are but they used to be annual back in the early days.

Next year's Copa America is the 44th edition while Euro 2016 will only be the 15th edition.

So really it's not fair to compare number of Copa America wins to number of European Championship wins (unless you divide the Copa wins by 3)

What are you on about? England still had enough chances winning tournaments in the past and either blew it or got defeated by better teams in the process.

Even though you don't have to qualify for the Copa (there just isn't more than ten, maybe twelve teams down there), you still want to win it.

Given the amount of times they play each other during the Copa, qualifying for the post-group stage is just as hard as qualifying for the Euros.

[Corky]

 

So we were convieniently the best side in the world for four decades right at the exact same time we refused to play anybody else in the World or compete in major tournaments.

 

Just when we started to enter the World Cup's in the 50's (two first round eliminations) we obviously all of a sudden had become shite

 

Ever get the feeling we might have lost had we actually turned up given what has happened since?

 

 

 

I can't get Mike Bassett out of my head when I read his posts. "We're England, we invented the game and we're going to get it back".

[Donut]

The Euro's has more depth, but as for qualifying being a valid argument? The main candidates in Europe walk through qualifying because every group is filled with average teams and shite in the lower pots. Venezuela, Bolivia, Paraguay, the teams that you use to argue South America is weak would be miles ahead of a good number of European teams.

 

And as MattP says, historical records suggest getting past Brazil and Argentina (not to mention Uruguay) is bloody hard.

[Guest MattP]

I can't get Mike Bassett out of my head when I read his posts. "We're England, we invented the game and we're going to get it back".

 

It's the sort of shit you hear in the pub everyweek from the bloke who watches England/Sky Sports News/Match of the Day and nothing else just spouting every cliche in the book that has been disproved.

 

You know the sort,

 

Nah mate Spain has only got two teams

Nah mate Italy is boring innit

Nah mate German league is shit, everygame ends 0-0.

Premier League, best in the World, everyone watches it

Spain can't win it, ain't got a big man up front

Get the big guy on and get it all up there

Get the fast guy on and knock it long

Get the small guy off he does nothing

CelticRangers should join the Premier League, with their support they would win it next season.

Need a 20 goal a year man, can't win anything without one

We would have won that World Cup with Redknapp in charge

Ferguson would have controlled Gazza

Ferguson couldnt handle Beckham's wife

South America is shit, only got two teams

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

If Uruguay were European they would have 0 European Championships.

 

Or maybe 1 at most.

[Donut]

If Uruguay were European they would have 0 European Championships.

 

Or maybe 1 at most.

 

But yet Denmark, Greece and Holland have all won European Championships and done little to nothing in World Cups?

 

Uruguay would have, and would have done just fine.

[MC Prussian]

If Uruguay were European they would have 0 European Championships.

 

Or maybe 1 at most.

Still one more EC trophy than England.

 

But Uruguay aren't as good as England. I get it.

[Guest ttfn]

No I mean better team.

Their captain clearly hasn't fitted in at West Brom this doesn't make him a bad player. And in Godin he has someone next to him who is better than any center back we have, and Maxi Pereira is much, much better than any of our woeful right back options. They have a dangerous winger in Rodriguez and Gargano is a better break up player than any we've got, add to that arguable the best strike force in the tournament and you have a formidable team playing on it's home continent, top seeded in the group for a reason their a force to be reckoned with, unless you're a little Englander like yourself.

Lugano hasn't fitted in anywhere for a while.

There's a nasty inverse snobbery towards the England team. We've got an ok squad, so have Uruguay. Our strength compared to theirs (somewhat obviously given we have 15x the population) lies in the fact we have a lot of solid 6-7/10 players. Uruguay have two world class forwards who on their day can make the difference. Beyond that they've not got more than a couple of players who'd get in the England side.

Italy are a different proposition, if you were to make a composite XI I doubt you'd get more than 3 England players in there and 2 of them would be centre forwards who looked like they'd never met each other when they played together last week.

[BlueSi13]

Not really getting into the arguments here but a couple of points, during England's self-inflicted exile during the early days of football, England had a spectacular record against other nations, including the unofficial world cup final against recent world cup winners Italy in 34 which England won 3-2.  It is more than reasonable to suggest that if England, the mothers of football, had actually entered tournaments in those early days our record may look somewhat different.

 

It is 100% reasonable to also add IMO that that exile did almost irreparable damage to our long term growth as a footballing nation as other countries grew and evolved their style of play whereas our remained rooted in how it was originally played (See our drubbings against the Hungarians in the 50's).  Obviously something we have never really come to terms with.

 

Also, officially Italy didn't 'beat' us at Euro 2012, penalty defeats are officially classed as draws.  England's last competitive defeat still came against Germany at the World Cup 2010.

 

Still, hoping for the best but fearing the worst as usual.  Will still make great TV (sort of) whatever happens 

[Guest ttfn]

Not really getting into the arguments here but a couple of points, during England's self-inflicted exile during the early days of football, England had a spectacular record against other nations, including the unofficial world cup final against recent world cup winners Italy in 34 which England won 3-2. It is more than reasonable to suggest that if England, the mothers of football, had actually entered tournaments in those early days our record may look somewhat different.

It is 100% reasonable to also add IMO that that exile did almost irreparable damage to our long term growth as a footballing nation as other countries grew and evolved their style of play whereas our remained rooted in how it was originally played (See our drubbings against the Hungarians in the 50's). Obviously something we have never really come to terms with.

Also, officially Italy didn't 'beat' us at Euro 2012, penalty defeats are officially classed as draws. England's last competitive defeat still came against Germany at the World Cup 2010.

Still, hoping for the best but fearing the worst as usual. Will still make great TV (sort of) whatever happens

Has somebody been reading Jonathan Wilson?

The Anatomy of England is a great book, I'd thoroughly recommend it. There's a really brutal deconstruction of our '75 and '93 teams.

[Pride_Of_The_Midlands]

But yet Denmark, Greece and Holland have all won European Championships and done little to nothing in World Cups?

 

Uruguay would have, and would have done just fine.

 

Yet Italy, who have done much better than Uruguay at the World Cup, only have 1 European Championship.