Cronky

Amidst the crap, there are a couple of good points in the article. Firstly, there is a lack of pace about the team. The only two players who have genuine pace - Zoggy and Martins - aren't great technically and good sides can blot them out of games. Secondly, I think there is a problem between Allardyce and Owen. It's not a relationship that's destined to last. Allardyce's system doesn't really fit with a specialist finisher.

Which is why the attitude of the crowd was so destructive today. It's worrying, because there's something self-fulfilling about it. The players lose heart and the manager's job becomes even more difficult. We've just conceded 7 in two at home of course the fans are going to be pissed off. You'd expect the crowd to be pissed off when their team is taking a real beating like that. What I found disturbing though is that there's a real movement against Allardyce now and it doesn't take much to set it off. The booing of the substitutions was just stupid. Zoggy was having a terrible game. Really, really terrible. I can't recall him getting in a single cross or shot. I can't even remember him finding one of his own men with a pass. He was just losing the ball every time he got it, without looking like he was going to achieve anything. Milner at least will maintain his morale and try and make something happen. Emre also lost the ball a lot, although he did occasionally look good and confident in possession. But we saw the old problem of him wanting a playmaker role rather than getting forward. Because Butt plays defensively, they end up side by side and the man on the ball has no positive options. Same as happened with Parker. Emre also only seems to defend when he feels like it. Putting on Barton was fair enough. Putting on Carr was never going to change things, but the game was well and truly lost, Enrique looked tired, and you can understand that Sam wanted to get Carr back in first team action. The worst part was the booing when Smith was named man of the match. He wasn't brilliant, but there wasn't any other possible candidate that I could see. He worked hard and he was the only player who looked remotely like threatening the opposition goal. Every crowd has its favourites and its non-favourites, but the fans just seemed to be reacting according to these pre-conceived collective opinions that take root, and not to what was going on on the pitch.

In the pre-match interview, Allardyce really looked like a man on edge. Normally he's relaxed, but he was sweaty and a bit nervy. He knew he was fielding a shit defence against a good side, and he knew what was likely to happen. He also knew that he was going to get no sympathy. He looked like a condemned man. It's very difficult to inspire a team from that position. The big problem is that a lot of fans seem to think that we're a good team in disguise, and it would be much better if only the manager selected the right 'tactics', or this, that or the other player. That's crap. We're a mid-table side at best and when we're hit by injuries we're worse than that.

Which is why the attitude of the crowd was so destructive today. It's worrying, because there's something self-fulfilling about it. The players lose heart and the manager's job becomes even more difficult.

There's way too much chopping and changing at the moment. Some of it is down to injuries, but some of it is Allardyce struggling to settle on his best eleven and his best formation. That's bound to be unsettling to the players.

The crowd were Liverpool's 12th man.

I started to worry a few weeks ago that the pressure was affecting Sam's judgement a bit. Starting with 3-5-2 - an unfamiliar and difficult system to pull off - against a top side is a bit dippy. Not surprisingly, the players had no faith in it, and it got changed quickly. With a defence of Geremi-Beye-Rozenhal-Enrique it's no wonder we got beaten, but all the chopping and changing doesn't help. Ironically, the subs were fair enough. Emre and Zoggy are big crowd favourites, but they were both losing the ball without looking like they were going to create much. Zoggy's limitations were very exposed. When he's denied time and space - which the top sides will do - he just runs into blind alleys and loses all composure. Far better to start with Milner and then bring Zoggy on as sub, when space has opened up a bit and he can get up speed. Martins was hopeless. Barely passed to a striped shirt all game. Big Sam just needs to keep things simple for now so that the players can develop a bit of confidence in one another and establish a pattern.

You're right, in the sense that if you're not confident about your technique, you're less inclined to use what technique you've got. I still think there's something in the point that other people have made though, that younger kids end up competing rather than practising, so their technique suffers at an early stage. But to follow up your point, there's an innate conservatism about the way a lot of coaches approach the game that doesn't help our players. It really needles me when I hear them trot out this mantra - 'The worst crime in football is to give away possession'. Bollocks. The worst crime is to waste possession. If keeping the ball means aimless passing along the line of the back four, then you're doing nothing except giving the opposition a chance to set themselves. If keeping the ball means a midfield player running backwards to collect the ball and then passing it straight back in the direction that it came, then that's a waste. A lot boils down to how well a player can receive, control and use the ball under pressure. You see a lot of good continental players almost welcome being pressured by a defender because it gives him and his team the chance to use the space that's then opened up. Instead of being frightened into shielding the ball or passing it backwards, they try to exploit the defender's over-commitment. It demands good control and passing and confident running by the whole team of course. With English teams, the same collective confidence just isn't there. The only team that really play that way is Arsenal in fact, and of course Wenger has very little faith in the ability and attitude of English players to play that way. The player that I get annoyed at in our own ranks is Nicky Butt. He often fails to exploit the opportunity for a positive ball by opting for something more conservative. It may partly be a lack of ability, but it's also over-caution. Yes, he hasn't lost possession, but he's wasted it by not exploiting an opportunity.

You no doubt hate the idea of Shearer as manager though, right? I think Shearer has all the qualities of a good manager, except the desire.

Hmm, I don't think many people here would say that tactical sense is a strength of German footballers tbh. I'd say that the general consensus would rather be that tactically most players are far behind other countries, especially Italy. The discussion about the need for much more tactical training in Germany crops up every other month tbh. Germany's record hasn't been too good tbh. After 1990 and before 2006 most tournaments were rather embarrassing. 1996 and 2002 were (lucky) exceptions, but not the rule. The thing that German football is (in terms of the national team) is looking brighter at the moment is because of a total change in philosophy after 2004. Klinsmann changed more or less everything in terms of "traditional" German football, from the bottom to the top. On and off the pitch. One major point is playing players to their strengths and only selecting players who fit into the current philosophy of an attacking style of football. So versatility isn't really the point. I don't think there is any difference between German and English players in terms of quality. What English football needs imho is a modernisation at national team level. That kind of modernisation that already took place at club level by foreign influx of managers and players. All you need is the right revolutionary manager who is able to shake things up and gets players performing to their ability. I watched Germany play away against Wales a few months ago, and I thought they were outstanding. They were playing a style of football that was well beyond the England team. It wasn't so much that their best players were more skilful on the ball, as that every single player, defenders as well as attackers, seemed to have a degree of confidence in possession that enabled them to work the ball around very comfortably until they'd found an opening. The difficulty with an England team is that the ball will end up with a defender who's not very confident about passing the ball into the midfield, and so he'll try to hoof it long. We also have too many players who don't really like to receive a ball under pressure and they either don't make themselves available, or they don't get passed to, or when they get it they pass the ball back where it came so that they don't lose it. Rooney makes a big difference to us because, regardless of the opposition and regardless of his own form, he's always looking to receive the ball, and always trying to play positively when he has it.

I suspect that, when it comes to management, Shearer would like to come in at the top, or not at all. He wants to spend time with his family and he's wary of the demands that management can make on him, which are particularly harsh at the lower rungs, where you can't delegate so much. Alan Hansen has been touting him for the England job, and that wouldn't have happened without Shearer's consent. That's clearly a job that he fancies.

I wonder how many England players would vote for this - the opportunity at the end of the season to have the shit kicked out of you by a bunch of British players - often from the lower divisions - who are eager to prove a point by taking the English down a peg. No thanks.

Keane has a thing about players who have lost their hunger, but he's got a point when he says that the top players aren't performing as they should. Trouble is, with nearly all those guys, their club teams are better than the England team. International football is no longer the peak for them, football wise. That's one of the by-products of the Premiership. It seems to particularly show with Lampard, who can run riot in a free role at Chelsea, knowing that he's surrounded by great players who will deliver the ball right into his path. What's more, Chelsea are nearly always better than the opposition. With England, he has to scratch around a bit, and so naturally he doesn't look like he's enjoying himself particularly.

I say give the players a good long rest this summer. The Home internationals were abandoned before because everyone had lost interest. Nothing's changed as far as I'm concerned.

They've got to look at their system for appointing the next manager. That drawn-out, committee decision ended up with the candidate that the fewest people objected to, rather than a positive choice. There's such a lot of pressure in that job, and you really need someone with a proven record of handling the big time. McClaren didn't really have enough faith in his own judgement, and ended up dithering eg playing 3-5-2 for a crucial game, then dropping it - dropping Beckham, restoring him, dropping him again - dropping Robinson too late and replacing him with someone inexperienced for the crucial game. It often hangs on certain decisions here and there, and McClaren managed to get too many wrong.

It feels a bit like kicking a corpse, but what the hell. Did anyone else wonder about the likes of Rooney, Ferdinand and Terry hanging around the dressing room as though they were an active part of the squad? Presumably McClaren thought it would be good for team spirit, but I can't imagine that they'd have had much to contribute in reality. And if you're not contributing, you're a distraction. Bit of a naive decision, I reckon.

You'd have to say that picking Carson turned out to be a big, big mistake. I thought he'd be okay, but McClaren should have been in a position to assess the lad's temperament, and he got it wrong. He gave the crucial first goal away, he never settled and that must have had a knock-on effect on the defence. He looked very quiet - he wasn't helping his defenders much. There have been too many mistakes of that kind over the qualifying campaign, and he has to go. It's not the first time we've failed to make a major tournament, but that wasn't a particularly difficult group.

Na. Germany. Easily.

Oh dear. The defence was very poor, and didn't get much protection. For the third goal, he had more time than a snooker player to make his shot. After all the subs, we had no shape and looked a bit of a mess.

the only thing now is to hoof it long and hope to get a break in the penalty box. Might happen.

Carson still looks jittery. There's another accident waiting to happen there. I'd sub him as well.

Cole and W-P did well down the wings. Crouch won plenty in the air. No-one to put away the chances. Defoe looks like a good idea.

Carson just didn't move his feet for the first goal. Sluggish footwork is usually a sign of nerves. All the same, we shouldn't be behind at all, let alone 2-0. Those of us who witnessed England-Poland in 73 are not getting good vibes.

I like the 4-3-3. That looks like the best team he could have picked. Bit of a dilemma whether to play Lescott in the centre or at full back. I really like to see Richards at full back, he's so effective going forward. But last time I saw Lescott in the centre he looked nervous, so better push him wide. And on the state of the pitch, isn't there supposed to be a retractable roof that can protect it? There's a rumour that the roof doesn't actually work.

Martin Samuel's point is a good point, but not an original one. The tendency of kids to be herded into 11 a side games on full size pitches too early has long been a bone of contention. Our players are not as technically gifted as their foreign counterparts, although I think the gap is narrowing. The influence of foreign players in the Premiership is helping us here. But at the moment, as before, we can usually manage to get to the final eight or so, but fall short when it comes to reaching for the very best. The second major problem is the pressure that is put on the England manager. I've seen so many good people struggle and then crumble in that job. Although they start off with firm, confident ideas, the barrage of criticism from the media eventually leads to them losing faith in their judgement, and being too conservative, or picking the players that everyone wants them to pick. It's no coincidence that our only successful manager, Alf Ramsey, didn't give a flying one what anyone thought, and picked the players and the style that he believed in. The press hated him for it, of course. Winning the World Cup only brought about a temporary reprieve. Eriksson was strong for a long while, but it got to him in the end as well. He really stumbled along at the last World Cup due to some bad selections. McClaren seems to have succumbed very early.