On the ropes...not mathematically dead but the last rites are being read.
Captain49,914 posts
20 Jun 2014, 00:54
#1
20 Jun 2014, 00:54#1
Lessons from the WC....England's young team
Started by Mozart22 REPLIES311 VIEWS· 20 Jun 2014, 00:54
sharkbok
Captain23,295 posts
Captain23,295 posts
20 Jun 2014, 00:56
#2
20 Jun 2014, 00:56#2
Not sure if the team would have done better or worse what ever their age.
It was Gerard their most experienced player that gave the game away.
I dont follow football, but apart from Rooney - the team is average at best.
Even Rooney when put on the world stage without foreign players in Manchester United is nothing exceptional.
English coaches also seem to be clueless, they seem to think they have a great understanding of football - but they dont.
They would be better served with a foreign coach.
It was Gerard their most experienced player that gave the game away.
I dont follow football, but apart from Rooney - the team is average at best.
Even Rooney when put on the world stage without foreign players in Manchester United is nothing exceptional.
English coaches also seem to be clueless, they seem to think they have a great understanding of football - but they dont.
They would be better served with a foreign coach.
Pro2,471 posts
20 Jun 2014, 01:23
#3
20 Jun 2014, 01:23#3
Their coach is awful. Glen Johnson, Jagielka and Welbeck should not of played, the first one shouldn't of been called up IMO.
Henderson and Gerrard offer basically the same thing, Wilshere should of started over Henderson. Only if Oxlade-Chamberlain had not got injured.
Henderson and Gerrard offer basically the same thing, Wilshere should of started over Henderson. Only if Oxlade-Chamberlain had not got injured.
Captain40,032 posts
20 Jun 2014, 01:39
#4
20 Jun 2014, 01:39#4
You all miss the pooint. The premier division is made up of foreigners.Hahhahahahaha talk about shooting one self in the foot - much like France in rugby. Did Oz not thump them!!
Pro9,374 posts
20 Jun 2014, 01:47
#5
20 Jun 2014, 01:47#5
Their mistake was to appoint Good old Woy for the job. Uncle 'Arry should have been in charge. Their defence was atrocious. Sharkbok is correct. Jackson... bahh. Being a Gooner, I never really liked any of these three....... Terry, Cashley Hole and Rio Ferdinand, but those three players who are still good and should have been at the back assisting Hart in defence. Instead, Rio is sitting in the studio lamenting the balls-up with Gary Lineker and Alan Shearer.
Pro2,471 posts
20 Jun 2014, 01:51
#6
20 Jun 2014, 01:51#6
Good point, Woy should not have been made manager .
Coach57,555 posts
20 Jun 2014, 03:43
#7
20 Jun 2014, 03:43#7
The issue has in reality nothing to do with age - there is a weakness in English club soccer and also in club rugby - and that is the large number of contract players from foreign countries playing on club level.
In his comments on Boots & All the French commentator referred to that problem in French Rugby as a cancer.
What happened tonight to England was that the Uruguay player who scored the winning goals was Luiz Guarez = who plays for Liverpool.
The general argument is that the influx of foreign contract players means that the game (both rugby and soccer) suffers from lack of local development of players and means that local soccer and rugby players are kept out of what is in reality professional jobs by foreign competition/players.
In such an environment the player coming through on local level is not sufficient to ensure positive growth in respect of the national teams. What is lost here by the age sideshow as that the "Old" English team in 2010 was even worse than the present team.
Unless the number of foreign players in all codes of sport in countries like France and England is not restricted - local sport development will suffer and will be constantly on the back foot.
However, the opposite is also true - and that is countries who rely on tgoreihn club players only is also at a disadvantage. The Club players have differences in playing styles and to melt those ingrained approaches and built up cohesive national teams are very difficult.
In his comments on Boots & All the French commentator referred to that problem in French Rugby as a cancer.
What happened tonight to England was that the Uruguay player who scored the winning goals was Luiz Guarez = who plays for Liverpool.
The general argument is that the influx of foreign contract players means that the game (both rugby and soccer) suffers from lack of local development of players and means that local soccer and rugby players are kept out of what is in reality professional jobs by foreign competition/players.
In such an environment the player coming through on local level is not sufficient to ensure positive growth in respect of the national teams. What is lost here by the age sideshow as that the "Old" English team in 2010 was even worse than the present team.
Unless the number of foreign players in all codes of sport in countries like France and England is not restricted - local sport development will suffer and will be constantly on the back foot.
However, the opposite is also true - and that is countries who rely on tgoreihn club players only is also at a disadvantage. The Club players have differences in playing styles and to melt those ingrained approaches and built up cohesive national teams are very difficult.
sharkbok
Captain23,295 posts
Captain23,295 posts
20 Jun 2014, 04:33
#8
20 Jun 2014, 04:33#8
I dont think that it is conclusive that having lots of foreign players in your own national league is detrimental to the development of local players. Their are lots of Club teams in England, so their is lots of oppertunity. If anything it might raise the level of local players, being exposed to the best players in the world.
Also, England get to package the broadcasting rights of the Premiership and sell this to TV stations all round the world and make money from the advertising revenue the viewership has access to.
The French are doing the same by making a marketable product and selling it back to a country like South Africa- where we pay to watch our own players, playing in a foreign league.
Brazil have some of the best players in the world, but no one watches the Brazillian national tournament, instead everyone watches their players in European Tournaments. The european countries then generate the revenue which they can use to pay massive salaries that Brazil could never do.
The English football team are very highly paid. They are just many players that are not of international standard. Rooney is their only chance of getting a goal most of the time
Also, England get to package the broadcasting rights of the Premiership and sell this to TV stations all round the world and make money from the advertising revenue the viewership has access to.
The French are doing the same by making a marketable product and selling it back to a country like South Africa- where we pay to watch our own players, playing in a foreign league.
Brazil have some of the best players in the world, but no one watches the Brazillian national tournament, instead everyone watches their players in European Tournaments. The european countries then generate the revenue which they can use to pay massive salaries that Brazil could never do.
The English football team are very highly paid. They are just many players that are not of international standard. Rooney is their only chance of getting a goal most of the time
Pro9,374 posts
20 Jun 2014, 12:49
#9
20 Jun 2014, 12:49#9
The number of foreign players at clubs is nonsense. It is the same all over. The rest of the European clubs have as many foreign players as England clubs. To say that Suarez is so good because he is playing in the Premier League is bull dust. He is playing in the Premier League because he is so good. That is the bottom line. The current state of the England team is down to two things. Management and injuries. As I said above, they went for younger and less experienced defenders by dropping the likes of Ashley Cole, John Terry and Rio Ferdinand. The time to drop the "old" players and bring in "young blood" is after the world cup and not shortly before it. Yes, it is true that Steven Gerrard could not defend against Luis Suarez but he is a centre midfielder. The entire defensive set-up at the back were absent. That would not have been the case with the likes of the experienced defenders like Cole, Terry and Ferdinand.
To make matters worse, they had injuries to a number of key players like Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain and Theo Walcott. Wallcot was out long before the start of the competition but Ox got injured in Brazil. Wilshere is also not fully rec overed.
To make matters worse, they had injuries to a number of key players like Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain and Theo Walcott. Wallcot was out long before the start of the competition but Ox got injured in Brazil. Wilshere is also not fully rec overed.
Pro4,378 posts
20 Jun 2014, 13:51
#10
20 Jun 2014, 13:51#10
This was a WC too soon for the younger players coming into the set up, there are injuries to key players, as Ceradyne rightly says, and the older players are now past it.
But I am afraid that the structure of the Prem doesn't help Grass Roots Football in that too many good and promising players do fall by the wayside so that foreign players can take their place. It has been known for many a year and Rugby has stupidly followed suit.
It doesn't help the National game one iota nor does the gross obsession with money and fame that now permeates the sport. They won't care they have lost the match unless it impacts on their earnings and that is very sad.
The game is rotten.
My brother is in Brazil for the Pool games.........he said he would be coming back with the Team. Even the supporters expect them to fail !
But I am afraid that the structure of the Prem doesn't help Grass Roots Football in that too many good and promising players do fall by the wayside so that foreign players can take their place. It has been known for many a year and Rugby has stupidly followed suit.
It doesn't help the National game one iota nor does the gross obsession with money and fame that now permeates the sport. They won't care they have lost the match unless it impacts on their earnings and that is very sad.
The game is rotten.
My brother is in Brazil for the Pool games.........he said he would be coming back with the Team. Even the supporters expect them to fail !
Captain40,032 posts
20 Jun 2014, 14:19
#11
20 Jun 2014, 14:19#11
Please Sharkbok wake up. The Premier division is the highest profile soccer tournament in the world. Yet England have won only one world cup and that was back in the 60s!Becs has it spot on.
As they say the proof is in the eating. They have shot themsleves in the foot big time and ditto France. Serves the parasites right!
Ou windpomp loves imports being a bulle supporter. WP maintain these oaks. Morne, Hougaard, Pollard, JJ and probably a few others! Bulle are a full blown parasite union!
If its not us propping them up it's the Cheetahs!
Away with parasite activity. A few imports but things have got out of hand.
We will have more professional SA players overseas than here soon - if not already.
We are propping up the rugby world bar nz who relies in the islanders - Fiji, Tonga and Samoa who are happy to serve their colonial rugby masters.
Competition for Islander talent is hotting up with Oz stepping firmly into the market and England going that way too. Only SA with its immense talent doesnt need Islander backs. You oaks saw what Eesterhuizen did to those two kiwis. Hahhahahaha that was about as good as the closing rolling maul!
As they say the proof is in the eating. They have shot themsleves in the foot big time and ditto France. Serves the parasites right!
Ou windpomp loves imports being a bulle supporter. WP maintain these oaks. Morne, Hougaard, Pollard, JJ and probably a few others! Bulle are a full blown parasite union!
If its not us propping them up it's the Cheetahs!
Away with parasite activity. A few imports but things have got out of hand.
We will have more professional SA players overseas than here soon - if not already.
We are propping up the rugby world bar nz who relies in the islanders - Fiji, Tonga and Samoa who are happy to serve their colonial rugby masters.
Competition for Islander talent is hotting up with Oz stepping firmly into the market and England going that way too. Only SA with its immense talent doesnt need Islander backs. You oaks saw what Eesterhuizen did to those two kiwis. Hahhahahaha that was about as good as the closing rolling maul!
Pro9,374 posts
20 Jun 2014, 14:23
#12
20 Jun 2014, 14:23#12
I don't think that Rio, Ashley and Terry were too old for a last WC, becs. They were the ones that were actually missed in this game against Uruguay.
I also do not believe that not enough is done at grass roots. You just have to drive around on a weekend to see how many leagues are being played all over. I have, on one Sunday recently, had a look and there were three matches going all within walking distance from us. Apart from that, all the clubs have academy and reserve sides going.
If we could have the same amount of activity in rugby, in SA, that England football have at those levels, we would have an almost endless pool of players. In addition, a lot of EPL clubs are trying to use more English players. It is only the fatcats, at the top, with the foreign cheque books who is not doing anything. Arsene Wenger has said, quite some time ago, that he is planning to build the future Arsenal teams around strong English players and he has shown it. His English youngsters are all starting to become key players in his squad. Theo Wallcott, Jack Wilshire, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Jenkinson (who is become more and more of a regular) and Kieran Gibbs are some of them who are already regulars in the first team. Fifteen of their academy side of 25 are English players. The clubs from just below the top 5 or 6 in the league are the ones who are mostly using the English players and it is natural for this to happen.
The top clubs are able to assemble the best squads because of their financial resources. It is more the money that is available that is to blame than the "unwillingness" to sign the English players. That's the way it is
I also do not believe that not enough is done at grass roots. You just have to drive around on a weekend to see how many leagues are being played all over. I have, on one Sunday recently, had a look and there were three matches going all within walking distance from us. Apart from that, all the clubs have academy and reserve sides going.
If we could have the same amount of activity in rugby, in SA, that England football have at those levels, we would have an almost endless pool of players. In addition, a lot of EPL clubs are trying to use more English players. It is only the fatcats, at the top, with the foreign cheque books who is not doing anything. Arsene Wenger has said, quite some time ago, that he is planning to build the future Arsenal teams around strong English players and he has shown it. His English youngsters are all starting to become key players in his squad. Theo Wallcott, Jack Wilshire, Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Jenkinson (who is become more and more of a regular) and Kieran Gibbs are some of them who are already regulars in the first team. Fifteen of their academy side of 25 are English players. The clubs from just below the top 5 or 6 in the league are the ones who are mostly using the English players and it is natural for this to happen.
The top clubs are able to assemble the best squads because of their financial resources. It is more the money that is available that is to blame than the "unwillingness" to sign the English players. That's the way it is
Pro9,374 posts
20 Jun 2014, 14:26
#13
20 Jun 2014, 14:26#13
@Beeno, "WP maintain these oaks....."
Do you remember my little list that I had? I have news for you. I am busy compiling an update one just for Weepers like you. This will just be a bit more detailed than the previous one. You are in for a shocker. Better get your Prozac ready.
Do you remember my little list that I had? I have news for you. I am busy compiling an update one just for Weepers like you. This will just be a bit more detailed than the previous one. You are in for a shocker. Better get your Prozac ready.
Pro2,380 posts
20 Jun 2014, 14:29
#14
20 Jun 2014, 14:29#14
So SA won the JWC final then did they Hasbeeno? Or did they choke?......
Captain40,032 posts
20 Jun 2014, 14:34
#15
20 Jun 2014, 14:34#15
Windpomp say now you have a good young player who ahs not made a decent clun as yet. But another good young player has made a foreign club. These twits sign up the foreigner.
If one got rid of all the foreigners reason dictates there will be more chance for English players to develop. This then benefits the national team.Everything else is twaddle. Foreigners are taking over football and rugby. Where this happens the national side is detrimentally effected.Those financial resources should be invested in developing English players not foreign players if you want national success as a priority.
We are negatively effected by our players going overseas and not being available for Super 15. No doubt ou windpomp disagrees even with this statement! Oh what a tiresome oak windpomp is!
If one got rid of all the foreigners reason dictates there will be more chance for English players to develop. This then benefits the national team.Everything else is twaddle. Foreigners are taking over football and rugby. Where this happens the national side is detrimentally effected.Those financial resources should be invested in developing English players not foreign players if you want national success as a priority.
We are negatively effected by our players going overseas and not being available for Super 15. No doubt ou windpomp disagrees even with this statement! Oh what a tiresome oak windpomp is!
Pro4,378 posts
20 Jun 2014, 14:45
#16
20 Jun 2014, 14:45#16
It isn't about how many teams we have at Grass roots level, I know we still have many. It is about opportunity. And sadly the influx of foreign players has wrecked the game. My grandfather and his friends saw it coming way back when it started. And they were right. As for the money. It is profane.
If they let this team gel, the youngsters, I mean, then some of them could do go things in the future. But that requires patience and that is something no-one has these days. Partly because of all the money that is involved, I think.
If they let this team gel, the youngsters, I mean, then some of them could do go things in the future. But that requires patience and that is something no-one has these days. Partly because of all the money that is involved, I think.
Coach57,555 posts
20 Jun 2014, 14:46
#17
20 Jun 2014, 14:46#17
Ceradyne
It is not bulldust - but you will never understand the gist og thje situation. The fact that there are so many foreign players contrascted by clubs - lead to reductin of career=opportunities for locals. It at the same time has a negative effect on local rugby and soccer development in the NH. The experts says it clearly - it is a bad system with a negative impact on local rugby and soccer development - but you do not understand it.
In the end the talent pools for selection of the national teams shrink badly and selection becomes a la more problematic issue for the national teams. You may not want to believe it - but it is a fact.
With the Saracens - Toulon final - there were so many SA and Asutralian players involved that I jokingly called it the SA Saracens vs SA Toulon final.
France is particularly badly off in that case. They have 14 Top Clubs - with 15 starting players = 210 players. In France the average club must really be employing an average of 6 foreign players from other countries - some has more, others less = 90 players. Leaving a pool of 120 players from whom the country can select a team. That is really not a large reservoir of players available for selection - now is that?
You will find that although England Rugby is not so bad - but soccer definitely is. Even in England from a rugby perspective their selection pool is likely to be limited to circa 120 players as well.
In SA and New Zealand that pool is nearer to 300 than 250 - bearing in mind the Super 15, ITM and CC competitions. That pool ends up being catering for more players per position as well.
All in all it leaves serious problems in certain positions and that is a negative for NH teams.
.
It is not bulldust - but you will never understand the gist og thje situation. The fact that there are so many foreign players contrascted by clubs - lead to reductin of career=opportunities for locals. It at the same time has a negative effect on local rugby and soccer development in the NH. The experts says it clearly - it is a bad system with a negative impact on local rugby and soccer development - but you do not understand it.
In the end the talent pools for selection of the national teams shrink badly and selection becomes a la more problematic issue for the national teams. You may not want to believe it - but it is a fact.
With the Saracens - Toulon final - there were so many SA and Asutralian players involved that I jokingly called it the SA Saracens vs SA Toulon final.
France is particularly badly off in that case. They have 14 Top Clubs - with 15 starting players = 210 players. In France the average club must really be employing an average of 6 foreign players from other countries - some has more, others less = 90 players. Leaving a pool of 120 players from whom the country can select a team. That is really not a large reservoir of players available for selection - now is that?
You will find that although England Rugby is not so bad - but soccer definitely is. Even in England from a rugby perspective their selection pool is likely to be limited to circa 120 players as well.
In SA and New Zealand that pool is nearer to 300 than 250 - bearing in mind the Super 15, ITM and CC competitions. That pool ends up being catering for more players per position as well.
All in all it leaves serious problems in certain positions and that is a negative for NH teams.
.
sharkbok
Captain23,295 posts
Captain23,295 posts
20 Jun 2014, 14:48
#18
20 Jun 2014, 14:48#18
Beeno is foreigners were not in the English Premiership, it would be boring. It would not be of international standard.
This would mean that the Premiership would no longer be a marketable product to be sold around the world.
This would create less opportunity for local players to play in a high level club tournament.
Many of the clubs would go bankrupt, and the local players would end up playing for pub teams with minimal wages.
It is like a foreigner creating a job instead of taking one, if he can bring something to the country that does not allready exist.
A team like Manchester City or Chelsea went from being crap teams, to international teams that have created lots of jobs.
If Foreigners were not playing in England, they would only have a few teams.
Englands problem is that their players are just not very good. They have built an excellant local competition, but the attacking players from England are just average.
Would you rather be an upcomming players with a contract at Kaizer Chiefs or Liverpool man United etc. Their young players have excellent oppertunities, and all these clubs have local academies.
What good is a competition like the South African teams have in South Africa, that is so poor that no one around the world would want to watch it. This means no advertising, which means poor salaries to the players, poor coaches, poor management etcet
The English have built a great product, which is a great oppertunity for their local players.
This would mean that the Premiership would no longer be a marketable product to be sold around the world.
This would create less opportunity for local players to play in a high level club tournament.
Many of the clubs would go bankrupt, and the local players would end up playing for pub teams with minimal wages.
It is like a foreigner creating a job instead of taking one, if he can bring something to the country that does not allready exist.
A team like Manchester City or Chelsea went from being crap teams, to international teams that have created lots of jobs.
If Foreigners were not playing in England, they would only have a few teams.
Englands problem is that their players are just not very good. They have built an excellant local competition, but the attacking players from England are just average.
Would you rather be an upcomming players with a contract at Kaizer Chiefs or Liverpool man United etc. Their young players have excellent oppertunities, and all these clubs have local academies.
What good is a competition like the South African teams have in South Africa, that is so poor that no one around the world would want to watch it. This means no advertising, which means poor salaries to the players, poor coaches, poor management etcet
The English have built a great product, which is a great oppertunity for their local players.
Pro4,378 posts
20 Jun 2014, 15:14
#19
20 Jun 2014, 15:14#19
Oh good.....I am so glad that the foreign players make it watchable at the expense of my National side.
We would not be useless without them. We would go back to being as good as we were before money took hold and we idiotically sold the soul of football for some coinage.
It is our game, our teams, our National side and we should be thinking if that above all else.
We would not be useless without them. We would go back to being as good as we were before money took hold and we idiotically sold the soul of football for some coinage.
It is our game, our teams, our National side and we should be thinking if that above all else.
sharkbok
Captain23,295 posts
Captain23,295 posts
20 Jun 2014, 16:15
#20
20 Jun 2014, 16:15#20
Becs I cant see how it is at the expense of your national side.
Imagine being a kid in South Africa aspiring to be a professional footballer- where their are allmost no foreign football players, and the national tournament is crap. Both the local an foreign football players in South Africa are poor.
In England, a young 12 year old kid with potential with get a great opportunity at an academy like Manchester United youth league. Their is much more opportunity to become a professional footballer in England than anywhere else in the world.
Bottom line is that it is not foreign players taking away the opportunity, it is foreign players creating more than they are taking.
England just have a better rugby team and cricket team than football.
England have some decent players, but they cant put a good team together from position 1-11. None of their strikers have exceptional speed or skill, so they will allways struggle to score goals. Also, none of the English players can dribble/run past people very effectively, so they will allways struggle to create space against good defences.
Even they fans on Sky Sports were commenting that it did not really matter if England drew or lost, because if they got out of the first round- they would have got knocked out shortly after.
Imagine being a kid in South Africa aspiring to be a professional footballer- where their are allmost no foreign football players, and the national tournament is crap. Both the local an foreign football players in South Africa are poor.
In England, a young 12 year old kid with potential with get a great opportunity at an academy like Manchester United youth league. Their is much more opportunity to become a professional footballer in England than anywhere else in the world.
Bottom line is that it is not foreign players taking away the opportunity, it is foreign players creating more than they are taking.
England just have a better rugby team and cricket team than football.
England have some decent players, but they cant put a good team together from position 1-11. None of their strikers have exceptional speed or skill, so they will allways struggle to score goals. Also, none of the English players can dribble/run past people very effectively, so they will allways struggle to create space against good defences.
Even they fans on Sky Sports were commenting that it did not really matter if England drew or lost, because if they got out of the first round- they would have got knocked out shortly after.
Captain49,914 posts
20 Jun 2014, 17:30
#21
20 Jun 2014, 17:30#21
Gerrard did not lose the game. In the first Suarez goal he lost the ball well outside the box, that should not be fatal, but the back three lost contact with Suarez. Likewise......where was the defence behind him when the goal kick cleared his head?
England lost because the back defence apart from Cahill was vulnerable...and because they cant score goals.
Why were they unable to put a very weak Uruguan defence to the sword? Firstly they have no midfield general who can shape their game. Gerrard put in a few nice balls, but the English style hardly put him in the creator role.
Then we come to the front four who never combined effectively. Sterling is quick but kept running into blind alleys. Wellbeck and Sturridge are much talked up by the Pom media....but they are pretty ordinary by international standards. They were ineffective apart from the Sturridge lead up work, which resulted in the Rooney goal.
Rooney is still the one English player who might be chosen for one of the top teams...he has moments of genius. He was unlucky on several occasions yesterday.
So its not a question of the League promoting foreign players and crowding out the Poms. There are plenty of Poms playing who are learning from their overseas colleagues and the higher standard of play. The trouble is the cream of the crop just aren't very good and the League disguises that.
Pro9,374 posts
20 Jun 2014, 18:12
#22
20 Jun 2014, 18:12#22
"England lost because the back defence apart from Cahill was vulnerable...and because they cant score goals. Correct. Exactly what I was saying.
Why
were they unable to put a very weak Uruguan defence to the sword?
Firstly they have no midfield general who can shape their game. Gerrard
put in a few nice balls, but the English style hardly put him in the
creator role. Correct once again. Like I also said, you cannot blame Gerrard for that one. He is not a defender and did all he could but you cannot fart against thunder. In addition, Suarez is not one of the best strikers in the world and to not have a proper defensive system in place against him is pure madness.
Then we come to the front four who never combined effectively. Sterling is quick but kept running into blind alleys. They missed a player like Walcott who can be blindingly fast. He left a massive gap in teh Arsenal attack on the right hand side as well, when he got injured. The best replacement for him, Oxlade-Chamberlain, is also out. Apart from that, their other playmaker in the midfield, Wilshere was also absent. Wellbeck and Sturridge are much talked up by the Pom media....but they are pretty ordinary by international standards. They were ineffective apart from the Sturridge lead up work, which resulted in the Rooney goal."
As I said, they lost due to two problems. Injuries and "Dear old Woy's" selections and injuries. Gee, I almost sound like ou Beenbal, going on about the injuries.
Captain26,388 posts
20 Jun 2014, 20:01
#23
20 Jun 2014, 20:01#23
Fck soccer, go the Orange!
— END OF THREAD —
