MC Prussian Posted 30 June 2014 Posted 30 June 2014 Russia have a population of 140 million people and are an absloute bag of wank. They weren't in the Fifties and Sixties, though (as the Soviet Union). So a similar case of a constant underperformer like England.
Guest Col city fan Posted 30 June 2014 Posted 30 June 2014 Costa Rica have a population of 5m don't they? The World Cup is about talent but primarily togetherness and that will to win. When Greece (a poor side) equalised last night I thought it was game over. I thought they'd win in extra time. But Costa Rica fought and fought and fought and in Joel Campbell had a player who DID NOT STOP running. Finally, they triumphed. What they earn and the standard of football that some of their lads play at, they put our over-paid prima fookin donnas TO SHAME. I am massively mpressed by their work-rate and commitment. Again, poor poor effort by our 'stars' and well done Costa Rica.
Pride_Of_The_Midlands Posted 30 June 2014 Posted 30 June 2014 Greece won Euro 2004. They have a population of roughly 11 million people. Your point is...? My point is that Germany have pretty much always been better England and everyone in Europe haven't they? Apart from 1966 when have we done better than Germany at a tournament?
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 June 2014 Author Posted 30 June 2014 My point is that Germany have pretty much always been better England and everyone in Europe haven't they? Apart from 1966 when have we done better than Germany at a tournament? Euro 2000.
kingcarr21 Posted 30 June 2014 Posted 30 June 2014 here we go again with arguments about population. fvcking ridiculous
Pride_Of_The_Midlands Posted 30 June 2014 Posted 30 June 2014 Euro 2000. Both went out at the group stage.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 June 2014 Author Posted 30 June 2014 Both went out at the group stage. Sigh. Stop being difficult for the sake of it. They finished 4th we finished 3rd, we did better.
MC Prussian Posted 30 June 2014 Posted 30 June 2014 My point is that Germany have pretty much always been better England and everyone in Europe haven't they? Apart from 1966 when have we done better than Germany at a tournament? When does your football history start, POTM? Yesterday? You forgot France under Platini, Italy in the 70ies and 80ies, the Netherlands under Cruyff in the 70ies or Hungary with Puskas in the 50ies. EDIT: Or England and Scotland waaaaaay back at the start of the last century. Yeah, but apart from that - all Germany. Right. Next thing you'll come up with is the population argument again.
Manwell Pablo Posted 30 June 2014 Author Posted 30 June 2014 And I am saying that they got further than us because they OVER-performed, not because we UNDER-performed. Why does their progress mean we've done terribly? Why can't we just accept that they did really well and we did quite badly? Just because some teams with worse players than us did well it doesn't automatically mean we did badly. In 2002 the South Koreans and Turks went further than us with inferior players. Did we do badly in that tournament? No, of course we didn't, we just had the mis-fortune to run into Brazil in the quarters and then failed to take the opportunity to beat them when they went down to 10. We did ok then, we didn't do ok this time, but we stunk the place out in 2010 and we certainly can't be accused of that this time out. We did Under perform though.
Guest ttfn Posted 30 June 2014 Posted 30 June 2014 We did Under perform though. Right, but the relativity of our under performance shouldn't be judged against Costa Rica, who over-performed, it should be judged against a team who have performed at expectations. Perhaps a more reasoned comparison would be - "look at France" rather than "look at Costa Rica". Costa Rica's wonderful World Cup should not be used as a stick with which to beat the England team.
MC Prussian Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 Right, but the relativity of our under performance shouldn't be judged against Costa Rica, who over-performed, it should be judged against a team who have performed at expectations. Perhaps a more reasoned comparison would be - "look at France" rather than "look at Costa Rica". Costa Rica's wonderful World Cup should not be used as a stick with which to beat the England team. Nope, but Costa Rica's progress should be just another example to England in an ever-growing list of teams to show what you can do at a major football tournament with little resources and relatively unknown squad members, without the same media hype/pressure and without the same big expectations. It should act as a constant reminder.
Guest Col city fan Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 Nope, but Costa Rica's progress should be just another example to England in an ever-growing list of teams to show what you can do at a major football tournament with little resources and relatively unknown squad members, without the same media hype/pressure and without the same big expectations. It should act as a constant reminder. This.. Same with Algeria.. What's Luke Shaw going to Man U for? 30 million quid AND 160k a week (or summat). He's 19 and has had one good season! Insanity is well and thriving in the Premiership....
Raj Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 This.. Same with Algeria.. What's Luke Shaw going to Man U for? 30 million quid AND 160k a week (or summat). He's 19 and has had one good season! Insanity is well and thriving in the Premiership.... If thats is the case,hence the reason England will NEVER do anything at World level. HUNGER. Why would a 19 year old want to play through Summer in a Competition when he's just had 9-10 months at his club earning 160k a week when all hes really bothered about is getting to his mansion inIbiza/dubai/whereever. Plus they are just not good enough!
Webbo Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 If thats is the case,hence the reason England will NEVER do anything at World level. HUNGER. Why would a 19 year old want to play through Summer in a Competition when he's just had 9-10 months at his club earning 160k a week when all hes really bothered about is getting to his mansion inIbiza/dubai/whereever. Plus they are just not good enough! The German, Spanish, Italian players, plus all those playing in the PL will be on similar amounts. It can't just be money.
Raj Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 The German, Spanish, Italian players, plus all those playing in the PL will be on similar amounts. It can't just be money. Is it the ethos of hunger and the mentality of the English players? As you say the Italians,germans,spanish are all on good money,the only difference being they obvioulsy have a little bit more about tham as humans as they are most likely playing footy in another country. How many english players ply their trade abroad? Obviosly i aint gotta clue why England are crap else i'd be a millionaire!!
Guest MattP Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 The German, Spanish, Italian players, plus all those playing in the PL will be on similar amounts. It can't just be money. They don't seem to get that at such a young age though where a desire would still be needed to reach full potential. We had Leicester players driving around in Mercs who had never played a first team match. Can you imagine whats its like at Liverpool, Man City etc
Guest Col city fan Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 They don't seem to get that at such a young age though where a desire would still be needed to reach full potential. We had Leicester players driving around in Mercs who had never played a first team match. Can you imagine whats its like at Liverpool, Man City etc It is one big, unreal world. These boys, just about literally, have to do NOTHING for themselves. They are found accommodation, often paid for by the clubs, have cleaners, people employed to cater for their welfare. Actually, their lives are geared up around just playing football. That's it. Don't get caught up in this is just a Prem thing though. There are many young players at Championship level who have their whole lives almost taken care of from a young age. Do you think that Will Hughes, for example, leads the life of a normal teenager? I doubt it.
Grandad. Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 Just thinking. We've not been ahead (or even scored to equalise) in a major championship knockout match since Euro 2004. The last time we went ahead in one Wayne Rooney hadn't broken his foot. Ecuador in 2006?
Manwell Pablo Posted 1 July 2014 Author Posted 1 July 2014 Ecuador in 2006? Quite right, David Free kick.
Grandad. Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 Quite right, David Free kick. I'm just a fountain of knowledge since this recent ban. What have I missed Manwell?
theessexfox Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 Article for my school newspaper, I've missed a few reasons but I had a word limit. WHY ENGLAND FAIL After England crashed out of the 2014 World Cup in the group stages for the first time in their history, accumulating a mere 1 point in the process, the problem cannot simply be blamed on a ‘negative manager’, poor tactics, and a distinctly average crop of players to choose from. We delve a little deeper… Overinflated prices for English players The recent purchases by Man United of Luke Shaw and Liverpool of Adam Lallana for £27 million and £25 million respectively demonstrates exactly how overinflated transfer fees for English talent is holding our national team back. Lallana is a 26-year with one notable season to his name, meaning his potential is limited, whilst £27m is a scandalous price for a fullback with one season in the Premier League, therefore being relatively unproven at the top level. Young talents such as Jack Rodwell and Scott Sinclair are bought at huge prices on astronomical wages and simply sit on the bench, wasted. Foreign players of similar calibre and ability can be bought from European leagues at a much lower cost, leading to the next problem… Not enough English players in the Premier League Germany, a country with relative international success over recent years, has just 22% of players in the Bundesliga being foreign. Likewise, La Liga in Spain has a mere 37% of foreigners playing, with the national team winning 3 major tournaments on the trot, albeit with a catastrophic World Cup 2014. In contrast, a huge 65% of players in the Premier League are foreign, which shows clearly a big issue in England’s consistent failure. Not enough English players play at the top level, meaning less talent is allowed to come through and perform on an international scale. Perhaps some sort of limit on foreign players in a matchday squad is in order. A ‘win at all costs’ mentality in youth football As Leicester legend Gary Lineker rightly said, the attitude at youth football matches is detrimental to the hopes of our national team. Too many parents encourage young players to simply ‘get rid’ rather than passing to one another, and both at youth sides and academies, too much emphasis is placed on winning at all costs, rather than being prepared to make mistakes and develop as players. We could do with following the Belgian mentality, which was to concentrate on how their style of player and let the results come naturally. A lack of qualified UEFA coaches There are a mere 1,161 qualified UEFA coaches working in England currently, in contrast with the 12,700 from Spain and 5,500 from Germany. This holds England back massively, as youth prospects simply aren’t allowed or able to develop and progress as much as they can. A clear solution is to increase the number of coaches in the country significantly. English players not playing abroad Every single English squad member at the 2014 World Cup played their football in England. In contrast, 7 German players and a whopping 16 French players plied their trade abroad: in English, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian leagues. England players of the past, such as Lineker, McManaman, Platt and Waddle all played for European giants in foreign leagues, allowing them to develop other ways of playing and become accustomed to alternative styles of play, making them more complete players. Perhaps some of our current crop should be considering moves abroad. Luck Yes, the set up of football at all levels in our country is seriously flawed. However, luck does play a part. For one, we encountered a tough group in 2014, facing Top 10 teams in the world in Uruguay and Italy and a surprise package in Costa Rica. Compare this with France, who faced the easier prospects of Switzerland, Ecuador and Honduras. Also, football is a game of fine margins and refereeing decisions; had Gerrard’s header had a touch more weight on it back to Joe Hart, or had Uruguay’s Diego Godin seen a second yellow card for a tough elbow, we may have been talking about a promising England quarter-final. As it is, we have some serious problems to address.
Grandad. Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 How can that be a reason for failure in a World Cup, 'Overinflated prices for English players'? Has no bearing on anything going into the World Cup before, only Rickie Lambert transferred before the tournament. Italy in 2006, no players playing outside of Italy. Spain in 2008 their final winning side, no players outside of Spain, 2010 only 1 played outside of Spain who started the Final. Again that point has no fact towards it being a downside. I agree with the coaching and luck points though. The simple fact at this World Cup is that we played the wrong players, in wrong positions, set up in a formation that restricted our better players and had no plan B when things weren't going right, to me that is down to the manager.
theessexfox Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 How can that be a reason for failure in a World Cup, 'Overinflated prices for English players'? Has no bearing on anything going into the World Cup before, only Rickie Lambert transferred before the tournament. Italy in 2006, no players playing outside of Italy. Spain in 2008 their final winning side, no players outside of Spain, 2010 only 1 played outside of Spain who started the Final. Again that point has no fact towards it being a downside. I agree with the coaching and luck points though. The simple fact at this World Cup is that we played the wrong players, in wrong positions, set up in a formation that restricted our better players and had no plan B when things weren't going right, to me that is down to the manager. Yeah the examples I referenced were after the World Cup but they're just examples: the prices are high in general, meaning teams like Newcastle and other teams of similar status have to look abroad. Fair enough about the Spain and Italy points, maybe I made flawed points there.
Manwell Pablo Posted 1 July 2014 Author Posted 1 July 2014 How can that be a reason for failure in a World Cup, 'Overinflated prices for English players'? Has no bearing on anything going into the World Cup before, only Rickie Lambert transferred before the tournament. Italy in 2006, no players playing outside of Italy. Spain in 2008 their final winning side, no players outside of Spain, 2010 only 1 played outside of Spain who started the Final. Again that point has no fact towards it being a downside. I agree with the coaching and luck points though. The simple fact at this World Cup is that we played the wrong players, in wrong positions, set up in a formation that restricted our better players and had no plan B when things weren't going right, to me that is down to the manager. He's not put his point across very well and it's not a reason for failure at this particular World Cup per-say but I do agree with him, plenty of English players look lethargic, over confident or just like they think their to good to be there when playing for England and money plays it's part. There's not enough effort put into keeping English players feet on the ground.
foxes_rule1978 Posted 1 July 2014 Posted 1 July 2014 Article for my school newspaper, I've missed a few reasons but I had a word limit. WHY ENGLAND FAIL After England crashed out of the 2014 World Cup in the group stages for the first time in their history, accumulating a mere 1 point in the process, the problem cannot simply be blamed on a negative manager, poor tactics, and a distinctly average crop of players to choose from. We delve a little deeperOverinflated prices for English players The recent purchases by Man United of Luke Shaw and Liverpool of Adam Lallana for £27 million and £25 million respectively demonstrates exactly how overinflated transfer fees for English talent is holding our national team back. Lallana is a 26-year with one notable season to his name, meaning his potential is limited, whilst £27m is a scandalous price for a fullback with one season in the Premier League, therefore being relatively unproven at the top level. Young talents such as Jack Rodwell and Scott Sinclair are bought at huge prices on astronomical wages and simply sit on the bench, wasted. Foreign players of similar calibre and ability can be bought from European leagues at a much lower cost, leading to the next problem Not enough English players in the Premier League Germany, a country with relative international success over recent years, has just 22% of players in the Bundesliga being foreign. Likewise, La Liga in Spain has a mere 37% of foreigners playing, with the national team winning 3 major tournaments on the trot, albeit with a catastrophic World Cup 2014. In contrast, a huge 65% of players in the Premier League are foreign, which shows clearly a big issue in Englands consistent failure. Not enough English players play at the top level, meaning less talent is allowed to come through and perform on an international scale. Perhaps some sort of limit on foreign players in a matchday squad is in order. A win at all costs mentality in youth football As Leicester legend Gary Lineker rightly said, the attitude at youth football matches is detrimental to the hopes of our national team. Too many parents encourage young players to simply get rid rather than passing to one another, and both at youth sides and academies, too much emphasis is placed on winning at all costs, rather than being prepared to make mistakes and develop as players. We could do with following the Belgian mentality, which was to concentrate on how their style of player and let the results come naturally. A lack of qualified UEFA coaches There are a mere 1,161 qualified UEFA coaches working in England currently, in contrast with the 12,700 from Spain and 5,500 from Germany. This holds England back massively, as youth prospects simply arent allowed or able to develop and progress as much as they can. A clear solution is to increase the number of coaches in the country significantly. English players not playing abroad Every single English squad member at the 2014 World Cup played their football in England. In contrast, 7 German players and a whopping 16 French players plied their trade abroad: in English, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian leagues. England players of the past, such as Lineker, McManaman, Platt and Waddle all played for European giants in foreign leagues, allowing them to develop other ways of playing and become accustomed to alternative styles of play, making them more complete players. Perhaps some of our current crop should be considering moves abroad. Luck Yes, the set up of football at all levels in our country is seriously flawed. However, luck does play a part. For one, we encountered a tough group in 2014, facing Top 10 teams in the world in Uruguay and Italy and a surprise package in Costa Rica. Compare this with France, who faced the easier prospects of Switzerland, Ecuador and Honduras. Also, football is a game of fine margins and refereeing decisions; had Gerrards header had a touch more weight on it back to Joe Hart, or had Uruguays Diego Godin seen a second yellow card for a tough elbow, we may have been talking about a promising England quarter-final. As it is, we have some serious problems to address. I'm glad the luck part didn't come in, the FA have no excuses this time... This was the worst performance since 1958, hope they start to wake up to the fact we are no longer considered a force in world football. All other points are certainly the reason for our failures... but the FA just choose to ignore them
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.