Englands World Cup Failure
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
England didn't fail really, at least not by much - they are generally a last 8 team, leaning towards a last 16/8 team in recent history. They only fail by the far too high expectations set for them by fans and media. The bottom line is they simply aren't good enough and aren't one of the major powers in world football.
They are one of the major powers in world football. On paper our current squad is probably the second (debatable) strongest behind Spain, it's just our players aren't performing when they put an England shirt on.
Nice to see another pessimistic post by a Scottish user.
Germany could have but they didn't. After the Lampard 'goal', Germany's goals and chances came about from counter-attacks as we were chasing the game.
I'm not going to sit here and say we were unlucky or deserved better but there's no getting away from the fact that Germany's 3rd and decisive goal was down to England over committing, chasing the equaliser. You'd like to think that had it been 2-2, which it should have been, we'd have not left 1 player back like we did for the free-kick that led to their 3rd.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,010
- Location
- Surrey
On paper?? On what paper exactly?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
How dare somebody do that, the integrity of Wikipedia has been ruined. How will governments the world over run their countries and university history students write their essays now that the reputation, and quality of their main source of information has been tainted.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
we have a team of good players - who all play the same or similar position.. we dont have a great spread of players... unlike germany who seem to have got a new group of decent players across the pitch plus experience of others who produce for germany.
Stop being pedantic. It's a phrase I'm sure you're more than familiar with.
A.Cole, J.Terry, Lampard, Rooney, Gerrard, Milner, Lennon, Defoe are all quality players on their day.
How many of our players would have you swapped if given the choice with the German team? Perhaps 1 or 2?
The problem is, we play as individuals and not a team due to our ridiculous setup.
Last edited:
How long can you go on saying this, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
I don't care what paper you're using, England is nowhere near second best in the world. This is so far off the mark it's funny!
[edit: damn this thread is moving fast atm; it's midnight!]
That's my opinion on the matter.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,010
- Location
- Surrey
All of them bar Terry, Cole, Rooney and possibly Gerrard if I was feeling kind.
Simply because the players aren't good enough, thats pretty much it, we have possibly one world class player and that is Ashley Cole i think he's the only player who can realistically be considered as one of the best 2-3 in the world in his position, Rooney may get there, but he's got no chance if he stays in the premier****, hopefully the Glazers will need to pay down some debt and sell him to Barca and then mabye he will develop into a world class striker as at the moment he's not even close.
Sorry but the players are not as good as they or the media think they are, the english players are largely carried by their vastly technically superior foreign counterparts, take Malouda, Ballack, Drogba, Essien, Anelka et all away from Lampard and replace him with English players and he looks poor, take Torres away and replace him with Rooney and Gerrard looks poor (allbeit, significantly better than Rooney)
The media do not help, in the sense that i assume as Capello is a highly successful manager he was well aware like most people that it was pretty obvious that after half an hour of the USA game Rooney was a waste of space and should have been hauled off, but he's in a position where if he had and it didn't work he's have been crucified, Rooney was complete garbage, easily up there as Englands worst player over the tournament, Heskey did more of use in the USA game alone than shrek managed over the entire tournament.
Doesn't mean he's a bad player but he was clearly either unfit or just performing badly, happens to the best but he's been built up by the media to be this undroppable force of nature, we'd have been better off going with Heskey and Defoe for the 3 games following the USA game, but setting out as a 1 man team when your 1 man is playing crap is only going to make him play worse, if Rooney had been dropped after the USA game and then was given half an hour or so at the end of the algeria game i think we could have seen a completely different player, as it was only making him play worse, as he will know better than anyone when he's not performing (hence the outburst after that game) if Rooney had played well and we'd still have lost and the team got the same stick, i highly doubt that he'd have reacted in the same way.
Sorry but the players are not as good as they or the media think they are, the english players are largely carried by their vastly technically superior foreign counterparts, take Malouda, Ballack, Drogba, Essien, Anelka et all away from Lampard and replace him with English players and he looks poor, take Torres away and replace him with Rooney and Gerrard looks poor (allbeit, significantly better than Rooney)
The media do not help, in the sense that i assume as Capello is a highly successful manager he was well aware like most people that it was pretty obvious that after half an hour of the USA game Rooney was a waste of space and should have been hauled off, but he's in a position where if he had and it didn't work he's have been crucified, Rooney was complete garbage, easily up there as Englands worst player over the tournament, Heskey did more of use in the USA game alone than shrek managed over the entire tournament.
Doesn't mean he's a bad player but he was clearly either unfit or just performing badly, happens to the best but he's been built up by the media to be this undroppable force of nature, we'd have been better off going with Heskey and Defoe for the 3 games following the USA game, but setting out as a 1 man team when your 1 man is playing crap is only going to make him play worse, if Rooney had been dropped after the USA game and then was given half an hour or so at the end of the algeria game i think we could have seen a completely different player, as it was only making him play worse, as he will know better than anyone when he's not performing (hence the outburst after that game) if Rooney had played well and we'd still have lost and the team got the same stick, i highly doubt that he'd have reacted in the same way.
Okay then, where would you rank Englands squad in the world in terms of ability?
The finals have been pretty terrible for England all round, sure they played sloppy today, I hear a lot of people saying that Germany "could" have been X more goals up,but the fact of the matter is that England were equal at 2-2 just a few blind linesmen and a stubborn FIFA stopped that, the ball went in, fact, German did not score more than 4 goals, fact.
Anyone who is saying that being 2-2 would have made no difference to the game is talking absolute tosh, firstly there is no way you can tell what would have happened, but what you can know is that a team that is chasing a goal is going to have to commit more to attacking than defending, leaving them more open. Different tactics, formations and substitutions would have been played by England if they were 2-2 at the end of the second half.
I have thought for some time that they need some kind of goal line technology, FIFA were waffling on about something to do with cost, how much can it cost to have an official that is at a TV screen keeping the REF informed of possible bad decisions? It is only a game, and in that respect we all watch it for the entertainment and that entertainment was sapped by a mistake that is easily avoidable. I can take England losing, and if they had gone out 4-2 or even 5-2 it would have been a much better experience for me than what happened today.
Also, anyone else sick of people saying "well I'd like to see you do better"?
Anyone who is saying that being 2-2 would have made no difference to the game is talking absolute tosh, firstly there is no way you can tell what would have happened, but what you can know is that a team that is chasing a goal is going to have to commit more to attacking than defending, leaving them more open. Different tactics, formations and substitutions would have been played by England if they were 2-2 at the end of the second half.
I have thought for some time that they need some kind of goal line technology, FIFA were waffling on about something to do with cost, how much can it cost to have an official that is at a TV screen keeping the REF informed of possible bad decisions? It is only a game, and in that respect we all watch it for the entertainment and that entertainment was sapped by a mistake that is easily avoidable. I can take England losing, and if they had gone out 4-2 or even 5-2 it would have been a much better experience for me than what happened today.
Also, anyone else sick of people saying "well I'd like to see you do better"?
30 - 40th.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2008
- Posts
- 26,303
NM
But you wouldn't really would you?
* 01 Neuer
* 03 Friedrich Yellow card
* 16 Lahm Captain
* 17 Mertesacker
* 20 Boateng
* 06 Khedira
* 07 Schweinsteiger
* 08 Ozil (Kiessling, 83)
* 10 Podolski
* 11 Klose (Gomez, 72)
* 13 Muller (Trochowski, 72)
England
* 01 James
* 02 G Johnson Yellow card (Wright-Phillips, 87)
* 03 A Cole
* 06 Terry
* 15 Upson
* 04 Gerrard Captain
* 08 Lampard
* 14 Barry
* 16 Milner (J Cole, 63)
* 10 Rooney
* 19 Defoe (Heskey, 71)
The only German players worth considering are Ozil, Podolski and Muller. They have 2 average center backs, 1 great full back ( A.Cole is even better) an average midfield and once again an average strike force. Difference is they play collectively.
