England reinstated as best team in the world

13

Comments

  • JGWJGW
    edited September 2010
    psj3809 wrote: »
    sk any brazillian fan if they were upset when they had a portugese manager who won the world cup for them ?

    Scolari? He's Brazilian.
    But still, why stop at the manager? Do the players all have to be English, only sleep in English made beds, only eat English food, only drive English cars, only use antibiotics that were developed in England...
  • edited September 2010
    JGW wrote: »
    Scolari? He's Brazilian.
    But still, why stop at the manager? Do the players all have to be English, only sleep in English made beds, only eat English food, only drive English cars, only use antibiotics that were developed in England...

    Yes the players should be English....you can stop there as the beds don't actually take part in the game.
  • beanz wrote: »
    There is an analogy in there somewhere relating to heads of national teams... :p

    I'd sooner have someone at the helm whose heart/soul/history was tied into winning rather than just his paycheck.

    Exactly, especially as it's financially more rewarding for England manager's to fail
  • edited September 2010
    beanz wrote: »
    Psj...so you'd be happy with Umbo Umbooto as the prime minister?

    Umbo Umbooto? I remember that...


    Way down deep in the middle of the Congo,
    A hippo took an apricot, a guava and a mango.
    He stuck it with the others, and he danced a dainty tango.
    The rhino said, "I know, we'll call it Umbooto!!!!!!!!!!!"
    THE RETRO GAMER IRC CHATROOM. EVERY SUNDAY AT 9PM BST. LOG ON USING THE LINK BELOW:
    https://discordapp.com/invite/cZt59EQ
  • edited September 2010
    Wow. What next? I see that so far those piping up have done a good job of ignoring the comments about several other national sides failing miserably even though their players are paid mega-wages like the England players. We then moved onto the next fail-safe argument of the national manager not being the proper nationality. Any proper England fan will tell you they don't give a monkeys.

    Hmmm, what's next? How about the other classic argument that there are no English youngsters coming through the system? I'll counter that now by stating that the youngsters coming through Arsenal's and Everton's ranks (Wiltshire, Gibbs, Rodwell, Gosling to name but too few) are VERY exciting prospects, and teams much bigger all over Europe than those they play for are giving them serious consideration. James Milner is looking like an England regular for years, Adam Johnson is looking every bit a player who can achieve massive things, Walcott if he can stay injury free and his confidence up has the talent and pace to rip any defender apart.

    In no way do I believe that England are tournament winners. They are a way behind Spain who play some of the dullest football in the most cohesive manner I've ever seen. Argentina have a squad the likes I've never seen but need someone to gel them together. Germany have a group of youngsters who are going to win something very soon. I don't think we're that far behind any of them.
  • edited September 2010
    F**king hate football, unless it Oakfield FC under 12s playing :)
  • edited September 2010
    Switzerland were the last team to beat Spain and England have just beaten them. Therefore England are the best team in the year. Phew!

    Nope. Now you must beat Argentina to become best in the world, as ARG beat Spain (4-1) two days ago...

    :(
  • edited September 2010
    Nope. Now you must beat Argentina to become best in the world, as ARG beat Spain (4-1) two days ago...

    :(

    But Germany beat Argentina 4-0 and then lost to Spain 1-0. Oh, I dunno, it's too confusing ;-)
  • edited September 2010
    Vampyre wrote: »
    Hmmm, what's next? How about the other classic argument that there are no English youngsters coming through the system? I'll counter that now by stating that the youngsters coming through Arsenal's and Everton's ranks (Wiltshire, Gibbs, Rodwell, Gosling to name but too few) are VERY exciting prospects, and teams much bigger all over Europe than those they play for are giving them serious consideration. James Milner is looking like an England regular for years, Adam Johnson is looking every bit a player who can achieve massive things, Walcott if he can stay injury free and his confidence up has the talent and pace to rip any defender apart.

    I totally agree. I must admit i wasnt a huge footy fan back in the 80's, the big teams werent bad but the rest i found very dull. All the foreigners coming over in the early 90's made me a huge fan.

    I think its helped english players become better, we have many many world class players nowadays. Go back to the 80's or 70's and we only had superstars like Keegan who european clubs wanted to buy. Now we have loads.

    However the main problem is getting these superstars playing together as a team, individually theyre superb. The problem i think is the money, when theyre getting 120k a week they seem to be on superb form, when they play for England they dont seem 'as' bothered, yes i know many players do as they wear the shirt but others i dont know, just dont seem to get into it as much.

    Rooneys performance at the world cup was shocking, i dont blame Capello, Rooney let everyone down. IF it was because he was worried about these dodgy looking girls hes been with its terrible.

    I'm happy with foreign world class players in the premiership, happy with a foreign manager. We have some great talent, more stars than i've seen for many years BUT they dont seem to gell well. Look at Greece winning the Euro championship, 99% unknown players but got the job done.

    We either have to have more friendlies, have a winter break or something. Playing with the world cup ball all season long last year would have helped (As Germany did).
  • edited September 2010
    psj3809 wrote: »

    I think its helped english players become better, we have many many world class players nowadays. Go back to the 80's or 70's and we only had superstars like Keegan who european clubs wanted to buy. Now we have loads.

    Like who?. I don't see masses of English qualified players being chased by Europes top clubs except in the bullshit printed in the tabloids.



    psj3809 wrote: »

    I'm happy with foreign world class players in the premiership, happy with a foreign manager. We have some great talent, more stars than i've seen for many years BUT they dont seem to gell well. Look at Greece winning the Euro championship, 99% unknown players but got the job done.

    I am happy with world class players playing in the English leagues but the problem is amount of "average at best" foreign players.

    Say for example you had a squad of players drawn from any country. 5 players for each position so a 55 player squad. This would be a true world class squad. Even if you went for 10 players per position for 110 players how many of the non England qualified players in the premiership would be in that squad (or England qualified for that matter) .

    My point is that the vast majority of these imported players are not world class or anything like it. The term "World Class" is badly overused with Sky / Fleet Street now taking it to mean "any player who we can bullshit up to make the product sound better". World class is a pseudonym for mediocre in football.

    I would be very much in favour of the Italian / Spanish systems where you can sign who you want but only so many non England qualified players can be on the pitch at any one time. That would be the same as English cricket adopted when it was overrun by foreign "superstars" and the England team was the poorest ever seen. As the quota's came in the England team got better and the quality of foreign player was much higher, real world class players who could coach our younger players and actually teach them something.

    This system doesn't brake any employment laws because you can employ as many foreign players as you want, its just you can only play a limited number at any one time.

    With respect to the manager I do think its important to have an English manager at both club and national level. Its no use complaining we haven't got any "world class" managers for the England team if non of the club jobs are there for them to improve there skills and get to "world class".

    Of course all the above is based on the fact I want a successful England team which is of no concern at all to the premiership. Since the FA and the Premiership have got totally different aims and in reality the premiership pays the bills why should they care about England. They just want the product which will raise the most money from broadcast rights.


    psj3809 wrote: »
    We either have to have more friendlies, have a winter break or something. Playing with the world cup ball all season long last year would have helped (As Germany did).

    A winter break allows people to spend time and money with there families, not what the premiership wants or needs.

    We need less games in total.

    A smaller top division - Like every other country in the world.
    Just the FA cup with possibly a second domestic cup for non premiership teams
    European football to go back to being knockout rather than league format
    Regular England training camps - Something like 3 days a month at Burton, sorry forgot, the FA still haven't managed to build Burton yet, after nearly 20 years.

    I see little value in a Winter break as I would bet that the big teams would probably use it for tours to the Far East (or whatever) as a money making exercise.
  • edited September 2010
    There's no way the Moneybags league is ever going to vote to reduce the number of games it gets to play, even though half of them are meaningless and the table is effectively split into three or four sections depending on the wealth of the club...

    And the "winter break" is completely unworkable. If it's to avoid disruption by the weather, it's a daft idea as you can never predict when the worst of the winter weather will strike. If it's simply to give players time off, then it's impossible with the way fixtures are currently allocated and the number of competitions involving the top flight clubs. There is already a potential clash between this season's FA Cup final and a programme of Premier League matches, adding extra blank dates to the season would make things worse.

    Capello has announced he's stepping down when his contract ends after the Euros in 2012. Which makes things tougher for the World Cup in 2014 unless there is continuity in management/style.
  • edited September 2010
    merman wrote: »

    Capello has announced he's stepping down when his contract ends after the Euros in 2012. Which makes things tougher for the World Cup in 2014 unless there is continuity in management/style.

    Aye because it worked so well in this years :p
  • edited September 2010
    merman wrote: »
    There's no way the Moneybags league is ever going to vote to reduce the number of games it gets to play, even though half of them are meaningless and the table is effectively split into three or four sections depending on the wealth of the club...

    And the "winter break" is completely unworkable. If it's to avoid disruption by the weather, it's a daft idea as you can never predict when the worst of the winter weather will strike. If it's simply to give players time off, then it's impossible with the way fixtures are currently allocated and the number of competitions involving the top flight clubs. There is already a potential clash between this season's FA Cup final and a programme of Premier League matches, adding extra blank dates to the season would make things worse.

    Capello has announced he's stepping down when his contract ends after the Euros in 2012. Which makes things tougher for the World Cup in 2014 unless there is continuity in management/style.

    Other countries have the break (winter) or an earlier finish to the season.

    I think the premiership should be like the NFL, theres a salary cap which helps make the playing field more fair. In the NFL its about 160 mill per team. Teams cant have all super stars, many are more of a 'team' as theres not tons of overpriced players
  • I'm sure whoever takes over the job will continue to pick big name players over players that are playing well for their club.
  • edited September 2010
    I'm sure whoever takes over the job will continue to pick big name players over players that are playing well for their club.

    Yeah i would like to see a friendly with a mix of different players, not the big name prima donnas but more like well known 'team' type players, like you say underated, perhaps not the flashiest player but they're known to do well for their team

    But i suppose at the end of the day premiership teams practice day in day out together, when they get together for England its every few months, have practices for a few days, have the game then back to their premiership team.
  • edited September 2010
    psj3809 wrote: »
    Other countries have the break (winter) or an earlier finish to the season.

    I think the premiership should be like the NFL, theres a salary cap which helps make the playing field more fair. In the NFL its about 160 mill per team. Teams cant have all super stars, many are more of a 'team' as theres not tons of overpriced players

    The salary cap sounds like a good idea, especially if it works in the US with all the money being thrown about there. I'd like to see FIFA look into that, but what will Manchester City say, I wonder?
    THE RETRO GAMER IRC CHATROOM. EVERY SUNDAY AT 9PM BST. LOG ON USING THE LINK BELOW:
    https://discordapp.com/invite/cZt59EQ
  • edited September 2010
    Spector wrote: »
    The salary cap sounds like a good idea, especially if it works in the US with all the money being thrown about there. I'd like to see FIFA look into that, but what will Manchester City say, I wonder?

    I'm torn when it comes to the NFL, every year now theres a different champion it seems, theres a couple of teams who still do well for quite a few years but theres not as many dynasties as there was in the pre-salary cap days. Plus its frustrating when you get a young player, train them up over years and then they just leave for the highest bidder in the future as you cant afford a couple of great great players as they just want tons of money.

    I must admit the premiership to me is much better than it used to be. Was Man Utd all the time, then Arsenal/Man Utd, then Chelsea/Man Utd/Arsenal.

    Now i feel theres a fair few teams challenging the likes of Man Utd, Man City i think come into that group now (Not Liverpool), back in the 90's it was a one horse race for many seasons, now its more of a wide open race (but granted theres about 5 teams now not just 2)

    The 'only' good thing is some of the big teams such as Chelsea/Man Utd have some very good english players in the squad and Man City have a fair few as well
  • No it's still Man U/Chelsea for the title. Arsenal third and Spurs, Liverpool, Man City, Everton and Villa for fourth. The rest are in a relegation battle. Not very interesting.
  • edited September 2010
    No it's still Man U/Chelsea for the title. Arsenal third and Spurs, Liverpool, Man City, Everton and Villa for fourth. The rest are in a relegation battle. Not very interesting.

    I dont know, Man Utd looked dire in their first game which was that draw. Just looked very average.

    Have to come back in about 12 games time but i reckon its still open, early days yet as some teams start a bit slow. Cant see Villa doing anything this year

    Still reckon Man City will hit their stride and do alright

    Either way its still better than the Man Utd dominance from the early 90's, now that was dull for most of it (until Arsenal started challenging)
  • I'd like to see 6 teams genuinely challenging for the title. Don't think it will happen in my lifetime though.
  • edited September 2010
    psj3809 wrote: »
    Other countries have the break (winter) or an earlier finish to the season.

    Other countries have the break (winter) AND an earlier finish to the season.

    And it should be said a later start to the season as well
  • JGWJGW
    edited September 2010
    psj3809 wrote: »
    I dont know, Man Utd looked dire in their first game which was that draw. Just looked very average.

    That Fulham match they drew was their second EPL game and they were away to a side who were good last season overall and gave Man United a thumping. Man United themselves hammered Newcastle United in their opening league match, and won the Charity Shield against Chelsea with something to spare.
    Rooney looked pretty crocked at the end of last season when Ferguson was insisting he was fit. Same in the World Cup. Now he's fit...
  • JGW wrote: »
    That Fulham match they drew was their second EPL game and they were away to a side who were good last season overall and gave Man United a thumping. Man United themselves hammered Newcastle United in their opening league match, and won the Charity Shield against Chelsea with something to spare.
    Rooney looked pretty crocked at the end of last season when Ferguson was insisting he was fit. Same in the World Cup. Now he's fit...


    Yeah, they're guaranteed a top 2 finish. Anyone who says it's not a 2 horse race is fooling themselves.
  • edited September 2010
    ADJB wrote: »
    Other countries have the break (winter) AND an earlier finish to the season.

    And it should be said a later start to the season as well

    With less teams in the top division and less games in their cup competitions. The League Cup in its current format has to change.
  • edited September 2010
    Just FYI on that....you should see baseball..they play virtually everyday in season..162 games per season or something like that
  • edited September 2010
    beanz wrote: »
    Just FYI on that....you should see baseball..they play virtually everyday in season..162 games per season or something like that

    Have you ever played baseball? You can be a fat bloke and/or be pissed at the same time and still be good player. Baseball requires next to no skill at all, think professional rounders with a bigger bat and a hard ball.

    Shit pay me the same as those lardy gimps salary and I'll play baseball 162 times in 3 months as well :D
    Every night is curry night!
  • edited September 2010
    Have you ever played baseball? You can be a fat bloke and/or be pissed at the same time and still be good player. Baseball requires next to no skill at all, think professional rounders with a bigger bat and a hard ball.

    Shit pay me the same as those lardy gimps salary and I'll play baseball 162 times in 3 months as well :D

    some of those lads are about 6'5. :D
  • edited September 2010
    Baseball requires next to no skill at all, think professional rounders with a bigger bat and a hard ball.

    Thats the equivalent of saying, these city bankers earning 300k a year, they dont do anything, just press a few buttons here and there !

    I'm not a huge fan of baseball but if it really did 'require next to no skill' we would all be playing it and be multi-millionaires!
  • edited September 2010
    psj3809 wrote: »
    Thats the equivalent of saying, these city bankers earning 300k a year, they dont do anything, just press a few buttons here and there !

    I'm not a huge fan of baseball but if it really did 'require next to no skill' we would all be playing it and be multi-millionaires!

    white men can't jump.
  • edited September 2010
    mile wrote: »
    white men can't jump.

    Racist ! ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.