Quote:
Originally Posted by Goofle11
Gerrard, Lampard and Carrick are FAR superior to the midfielders you named. I really like Barkley though.
|
At their peaks they were but that is not the point. The midfield is a mess, Gerrard running about like a dick and doing nothing in particular as usual. Lampard and Gerrard have played 61 times in the centre of midfield for England. Why has no cu
nt worked out that they can't play together? We constantly pick teams of individuals.
The system isn't working, as soon as we meet a half decent side we get dealt with because they are better footballing sides. This shouldn't be about picking individuals, if England are going to achieve anything, someone has to completely start from scratch with a new plan that is a bit more than just lumping it up the pitch and playing experienced players, which is exactly what England have been doing for years. It doesn't work, they failed, so get rid. We should be putting together the next team instead of plodding on with Lampard, Gerrard and Milner. The priority should be the long term like what Germany did after the 5-1 in 2001, not merely winning the next game.
I saw a Ferguson interview yesterday which summed up what is wrong with management generally and it applies to the England team:
Quote:
From the moment I got to Manchester United, I thought of only one thing: building a football club. I wanted to build right from the bottom. That was in order to create fluency and a continuity of supply to the first team. With this approach, the players all grow up together, producing a bond that, in turn, creates a spirit.
The first thought of 99% of newly appointed managers is to make sure they win—to survive. So they bring experienced players in. That’s simply because we’re in a results-driven industry. At some clubs, you need only to lose three games in a row, and you’re fired. In today’s football world, with a new breed of directors and owners, I am not sure any club would have the patience to wait for a manager to build a team over a four-year period.
Winning a game is only a short-term gain—you can lose the next game. Building a club brings stability and consistency. You don’t ever want to take your eyes off the first team, but our youth development efforts ended up leading to our many successes in the 1990s and early 2000s. The young players really became the spirit of the club.
I always take great pride in seeing younger players develop. The job of a manager, like that of a teacher, is to inspire people to be better. Give them better technical skills, make them winners, make them better people, and they can go anywhere in life. When you give young people a chance, you not only create a longer life span for the team, you also create loyalty. They will always remember that you were the manager who gave them their first opportunity. Once they know you are batting for them, they will accept your way. You’re really fostering a sense of family. If you give young people your attention and an opportunity to succeed, it is amazing how much they will surprise you.
|
You can use Lambert at Villa as a good example of building a team of young players and getting them to play as a unit, not just bringing players in for the sake of it like what McLeish did before him. Look where that got us.
Have you seen McEachran play btw?
Quote:
|
Walcott is a certain starter, as is Rooney. The left is between Welbeck, Chambo and Zaha.
|
Rooney has been abysmal in every tournament he's played in apart from Euro 2004. He's a bottle job. No one should ever get to the amount of caps he has when he consistently fails when it matters and in a team that has never won anything. Half the problem is the team never gets freshened up, just trotting out the same s
hite out year in year out.
I haven't seen anything from Wilshere to suggest he's a pussy, I do see him get stuck in quite a bit though.
Also Hart had two more blunders last night that he was lucky to get away with. I'd drop him too.