Would english teams win as much without foreign players?

Merlin5

Merlin5

Merlin5

Soldato
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Posts
18,404
Location
Finchley, London
How much of english football these days is dependent on each team having one or two star players from other countries? I don't follow football much so I might be completely wrong here. But from what I've seen, it always or mostly seems to be some non english player that saves the day with an engiish team. Case in point, cup final. If I'm right, I just feel it's not what team football should be about. It says to me that english players aren't good enough to get very far without the 'real' talent of foreign players propping them up. Makes it a bit of a farce tbh. Am I completely wrong? I probably am so feel free to put me in my place :p
 
England's top league has a much higher level of foreign players then a lot of the other countries at the top in Europe. My personal opinion is it limits and hampers the development of England footballers and development of the English game.

It's also coupled with a second rate youth system (We employ something like less then 15'000 coaches compared to the 30'000 in Spain and Italy and 35'000 in Germany, who've all adopted a much more focused level of youth development and imho it's show in recent years, look at the Spanish squad / team, German team and Italy are doing well) and the mentality that it's "easier" to buy young foreigners as well.
 
Also, think that with '66 it did a lot of damage to the English game and it's development. I think '66 cemented the idea that you can win a World Cup playing basically quite simple and fairly ugly football. (England certainly weren't the best "footballing" side at the time, England had a few decent players at the time though. Technical English footballers are few and far between, the best England side imho, was the Italia '90 side who were a really good "footballing" side yet won nothing, which was another massive blow for English football, as they never won anything playing good football)

That idea of playing a fairly simple, physical almost route one football has become so deeply built in to the English mentality a lot of the youth development is still about being bigger, faster and more physical rather then technical ability and understanding of the game. That's also damaged the English game.

Sorry if this is a bit "off topic", just a bit of a semi drunken rant.
 
It is easier to buy young foreign players though :/

If a Premier League side is interested in signing a young player from a lower division club, they get quoted figures of £5-10m. Why would you pay those sort of figures for unproven players when you can go to Spain or France and in some cases sign proven International players for that amount?

Regarding the OP; all the top sides in Europe, here, in France, Spain, Italy and Germany have and rely on top quality foreign players. The only difference between England and the others is like Tummy says, that we have a higher amount of poorer quality foreign players and that's down to the cost of signing English players and like Tummy says, a shortage of quality players coming through the academy's.
 
But then as a counterpoint, is any other league in the world as exciting to watch?

Just putting that out there. :)
 
The problem's been well discussed before.

The problem isn't the lack of English players but what we want from home grown football players compared to what we want our international side to do.

Very different things, which can't be solved as one.

In Spain it's been well mentioned that behind Barcelona is a mass of football sides that are trained to play just like them. Small, less physical, more skilled players with abundances of technical ability. We don't want those players in England as they're either ignored for being too small or too light. Put simply, there is more support and more teams like Stoke, than Arsenal.

In order to compete e.g. in Europe the top sides must have foreign players.

When it gets to international level and we're left with English guys the team just can't play. Winning a World Cup requires the players to change their game enormously compared to domestic stuff. It's too different such that we can't do it. This problem has been around for years, well before foreigners were here in abundance anyway..so..

The points above are correct as well, people assume that English players are expensive, but they don't just have an ordinary price hike, they cost a lot to train as well. And after that - they may not still even make it.
 
deSade said:
But then as a counterpoint, is any other league in the world as exciting to watch?

Just putting that out there. :)
Click to expand...

Depends how you define "exciting" I think Spain is a much better and more entertaining league. I think Germany is really up and coming, got some really good sides in Germany (and it's still cheap to watch and it's ran very well), Italy still play the game very well, just slower, it's much more about "football" and movement and tactics (similar to Spain but Spain's much quicker)

Also, some of the things that happen in South America are ****ing insane. They're completely mental and that's always entertaining.

I think the English leagues strength besides the money it offers :p is it's strength in depth, this season is a good example of there not being *too* much between a lot of the sides. Saying that, I think the quality this season has been very poor so it's probably not a good example.
 
Robert1986 said:
Look at Spain. Barca and RM is pretty much the Spain team. How many England players play for the top teams in the EPL?
Click to expand...

Hart, Johnson, Ferdinand, Terry, Cole, Gerrard, Lampard, Wilshere, Rooney and Carroll. That's probably 10 of the first 11 from the top 5 clubs and with Ashley Young possibly being the 11th, potentially on his way to Liverpool or Utd.

Real have no more Spanish players than the top English sides have English players. Barca are the only major side in Europe who have predominantly a home grown side.
 
The idea that foreign players hamper English talent doesnt really stand up for me. Players will find their level.

England were no great shakes in the 70s when there were no foreign players in the league, they didnt qualify for the WC in 74 or 78.

Take Arsenal as an example of a foreign laden team for years. David Bently couldnt break into that team because of the likes of Pires or whoever ahead of him in the pecking order. He learned from these players in training then went on loan to Norwich (making that league stronger), then onto Blackburn Rovers (making them a stronger side and thus the PL a stronger league) and then a big money move to Spurs, fair enough he didnt shine there but the career path he followed actually benefitted him and other clubs and took him to the brink of International football.
 
He really left though because of another problem that's endemic with English players - his attitude. Pennant's another example who Wenger booted out.
 
Yeah, English players attitudes are often one of the bigger stumbling blocks they have. Wilshire has bundles of ability and yet has been arrested for Sexual harassment (? iirc) and is a right **** on the pitch.
 
Yeah, I reckon English teams would still win the FA Cup if there were no foreign players. They'd probably even win the Premiership as well.
 
Greenlizard0 said:
He really left though because of another problem that's endemic with English players - his attitude. Pennant's another example who Wenger booted out.
Click to expand...

Yeah thats probably very true i was just meaning that he still had plenty of options despite not making the breakthrough at Arsenal.

Theres certainly a lot of question marks about the attitude of the young English players. Thats probably another plus side to having foreign players around as English players learn from their attitude (bit of a generalisation there of course). Cantona is credited with changing the attitudes of many United youngsters in training by staying back and practicing. Soon they were all doing it.
 
Tummy said:
Yeah, English players attitudes are often one of the bigger stumbling blocks they have. Wilshire has bundles of ability and yet has been arrested for Sexual harassment (? iirc) and is a right **** on the pitch.
Click to expand...

I think he was the peacemaker in a night club fight. RvP was the one done for rape - but then cleared.

And yes, he does have a younger Paul Scholes element about him. People remember his tackle on Pennant (I think) against Stoke but then don't recall that twice in the very same game he'd been hacked down. I don't mind it really, give as good as you get.
 
No, was this not a separate incident?

Anyway, for someone with that much talent he doesn't "need" to be such a **** on the pitch, his ability should let him get the upper hand.

He's got a really nasty snarly side to him, he just simply doesn't need.
 
Ideally no, he doesn't need it. But bar simulating like Barca what other way can a player help prevent nasty tackles in the first place without giving any back? His opponents are learning that he'll stand up for himself.
 
Tummy said:
Depends how you define "exciting" I think Spain is a much better and more entertaining league.
Click to expand...

Totally disagree. I watch a fair bit of Spanish football as well, and would say it's not a patch on the Premiership for entertainment. It's a bit like watching Arsenal at times, lots of pretty football in midfield - but not much excitement in the area.

Each to their own though. ;)
 
My view is not that we don't have enough English players but that quite simply our grass roots game isn't supported well enough by the FA and training at kids level just isn't good enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom