Keane - 'Look at some of the England players, they're shit players'

[ChezGiven]

England are over-rated, that doesnt make them shit, McClaren did that for them.

 

 

[Minhosa]

England are over-rated, that doesnt make them shit, McClaren did that for them.

 

 

 

This man speaks sense.

[Tooj]

Love how he also managed to say some players don't know the meaning of playing for their country. 

[Keefaz]

Howay! He's talking s****. If England players are s***, then the Sunderland squad is worse than s*** cos' none of them are close to good enough to play for England except their keeper.

Clearly he is talking about the relative merits of the players. If you think the Sunderland players are s*** then try playing against them one day. Then you might see what s*** really is.

In international terms he is quite correct. Many of them are s***. Not a player on the pitch who could lace Keanes boots tbh.

 

Rubbish. I don't believe it.

You might not, however, performances tend to suggest otherwise.

 

Brazil's performances in the 2006 World Cup would suggest their team's full of shit players, I'm pretty sure it's not, like.

[Guest Pie]

Howay! He's talking s****. If England players are s***, then the Sunderland squad is worse than s*** cos' none of them are close to good enough to play for England except their keeper.

Clearly he is talking about the relative merits of the players. If you think the Sunderland players are s*** then try playing against them one day. Then you might see what s*** really is.

In international terms he is quite correct. Many of them are s***. Not a player on the pitch who could lace Keanes boots tbh.

 

Rubbish. I don't believe it.

You might not, however, performances tend to suggest otherwise.

 

Brazil's performances in the 2006 World Cup would suggest their team's full of s*** players, I'm pretty sure it's not, like.

No it wouldn't. You're taking a ludicrously simplistic view. If you believe that side last night was full of international class footballers then fair enough. We'll disagree though.  If you're saying they aren't shit by our standards then, of course, I agree. If, however, you are suggesting that the likes of Lescott are anything other than cannon fodder at that level then once again, we'll disagree.

Of course McClaren is culpable. He has the charisma of 4 by 2. Croatia had better players in key positions than us and played very well. That some might not transfer that to the Premiership is very likely. In the same way as some of our lot are unable to transfer their Premiership talent to the international stage. The 'shit' comment is over the top. Are they good enough though on that international stage? Not likely in a fair few cases.

Nb: Brazil had players who have performed exceptionally well on the International stage. We haven't, very few of them haven't got anywhere remotely close to the levels that a fair proportion of the Brazilian squad have on the International stage. I didnt see anyone with the International footballing talent of Cafu, Carlos or Ronaldihno last night. There are some good premiership footballers on view last night. Were they anything other than average international footballers? Probably.

[Thespence]

A vaild point some of them players are shit but some of them lads have played & won Champions League final ( ) & didnt fuck off back home to wank the dog because the grass was long & Steven Carr was in goal.

[Keefaz]

Howay! He's talking s****. If England players are s***, then the Sunderland squad is worse than s*** cos' none of them are close to good enough to play for England except their keeper.

Clearly he is talking about the relative merits of the players. If you think the Sunderland players are s*** then try playing against them one day. Then you might see what s*** really is.

In international terms he is quite correct. Many of them are s***. Not a player on the pitch who could lace Keanes boots tbh.

 

Rubbish. I don't believe it.

You might not, however, performances tend to suggest otherwise.

 

Brazil's performances in the 2006 World Cup would suggest their team's full of s*** players, I'm pretty sure it's not, like.

No it wouldn't. You're taking a ludicrously simplistic view. If you believe that side last night was full of international class footballers then fair enough. We'll disagree though. If you're saying they aren't shit by our standards then, of course, I agree. If, however, you are suggesting that the likes of Lescott are anything other than cannon fodder at that level then once again, we'll disagree.

Of course McClaren is culpable. He has the charisma of 4 by 2. Croatia had better players in key positions than us and played very well. That some might not transfer that to the Premiership is very likely. In the same way as some of our lot are unable to transfer their Premiership talent to the international stage. The 'shit' comment is over the top. Are they good enough though on that international stage? Not likely in a fair few cases.

Nb: Brazil had players who have performed exceptionally well on the International stage. We haven't, very few of them haven't got anywhere remotely close to the levels that a fair proportion of the Brazilian squad have on the International stage. I didnt see anyone with the International footballing talent of Cafu, Carlos or Ronaldihno last night. There are some good premiership footballers on view last night. Were they anything other than average international footballers? Probably.

 

Good post, Pie. FWIW, I think England have a team of very good 'international-level' players. I honestly think, taken as individuals, we have at least as much talent as, say, the German side. Why is it that Germany have a fantastic record--and will probably get to at least the semis next summer--and we have a relatively mediocre one? Are the players really that much better? As individuals, was the German 2006 side really much cop? Or the 2004 Greece side?

 

In our recent past, we have not been able to create an excellent side out of a pool of good players and that is why we'll consistently fail. Maybe it is the players fault: maybe the English player is not organised or clinical enough, but surely that can be instilled by the right manager?

[NE5]

Keane is like a drunken scotsman standing in a pub slagging off everything English, in short a knacker [and even a racist if the PC brigade pushed the point further, but I suspect they won't or won't even see the point]

 

However, his standards of football are high, borne out of the arrogance of being a top player himself. No bad thing, but maybe a weakness as a manager. We will see.

 

I'm reading on with this thread as it seems quite interesting  .........

[NE5]

i think the blokes quality to be honest. All these "World Class" players we have, obviously arent. Maybe the teams they play in make them look better than what they are?

 

I keep thinking Gerrard is unstoppable, but i cant remember the last good game he had for England. We all know about Lampard. Bridge was a disgrace. Carson had a mare. Richards disapeared when the going got tough.

 

Beckham and Crouch are the only ones that came out with any credibility.

 

So yeah, i agree with Keane.

 

Based on last night, it does change your views. I've always thought Lampard was an overrated plodder with a good shot {thats all] and I have NEVER rated Wayne Bridge who I'm afraid is thought by many people is good simply on the back of being sold for 6m quid.

 

See the thread elsewhere about managers not being good judges [something like that]

 

For the first time, I thought Richards was a complete brainless arsehole, devoid of awareness to communicate with his team mates and to look at the whole shape of his fellow defenders and the team as a whole. Got doubts about him now.

 

I think that Crouch has re-affirmed my feeling about him that he is a top class player, as has the fact that Beckham should never been dropped although I can understand why MIke Baldwin did it. Trouble is, he was wrong.

 

Gerrard is good, but the sad thing is, he isn't as good as some of the equivalent players from the 1960's and 1970's.

 

McLaren was fantasticallly wrong to play such an inexperienced keeper in such an important game. I realise it may have gone well, but as general judgement, it was bollocks and for that alone the idiot deserves to be sacked, but never mind steve you've got your compensation I'm sure it will help you come to terms with the shame of it all.

 

Pity you didn't have the integrity of Keegan.

 

 

[ohmelads]

Team performances don't always reflect the individual ability of the players. Teams underperform and overperform, we all know that. Some of them may be overrated, but they're still good footballers, and Croatia are not Brazil either, they just played well collectively and we didn't. The England team are a poor outfit collectively, but there are plenty of good English footballers. They're not all world class, but so what? Only a few nations can field a team of 11 genuinely world class players and right now we're not one of them. What we do have is plenty of good players and a few world class ones to boot and what we need is a manager who will find 11 who suit a system and keep faith in them, even if some big names must be dropped to accommodate that.

 

It's not all doom and gloom, and I don't believe the problem is so deep-rooted. I was talking to my German friend about this, and how they were in a similar situation a few years ago where everybody was criticizing the national team and it seemed there were major problems. But a younger generation of players were given the chance and rose to establish themselves in new German team. Players like Lahm, Podolski, Schweinsteiger, Jansen, Mertesacker, Fritz, Gomez. Not world class players by any means, but players who fitted a system and in the 2 years before the world cup a new team was formed, players who worked well together and had the chance to grow together as a team. We all saw the result in the world cup. Fair enough they hosted the tournament, but they looked hopeless just a couple of years earlier. It's just about building a team that plays tactically disciplined football, you don't need a load of world class players to go far in a tournament, that's a soft excuse. We have the quality to be holding our own in major tournaments, we just need to find a means of putting it together and building a team that is tactically disciplined. Who says we can't do what the Germans have done?

[Zero]

The point is, German players have much better tactical sense than English players. They are also much more versatile,

like Lahm, Marcel Jansen, Borowski, etc. Klose and Ballack are world class performers with very balanced abilities as well.

 

It is damn true that in terms of technique, or individual ability, England isn't that far from Germany, or you can say they're the same I don't care.

But football is more than an individual game. The real problem of English players is, they couldn't adjust to any tactical changes and can only perform well when the team's tactics are building around them. For example, Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham, Owen...nearly all of your attacking players are "core" players rather than "squad" players. It is not that all core players in the world couldn't play well with each other, but England's exceptional -  the over emphasis on physical ability and attractiveness of individual effort but not teamwork. The players simply don't have the mental to accompany each other.

 

In this sense it is correct to say they are shit players. A player who could only perform under restricted circumstances can hardly be classified as "excellent players", eh?

Believe it or don't, the English players in international games do play like Luque in Newcastle. He is shit players right?

 

Actually I don't think England can be compared with Germany in international level. Check their past records in the previous 20 years, they are hardly in the same level. Such kinda comparison is already an overrated action imo. Bashing expected but this' what the other countries believe, take it or shit on it as you like.

[tmonkey]

I would like to see Lampard and Beckham dropped entirely from the squad, and Gerrard pushed out from the central midfield births.

 

Gerrard lacks the required game for central midfield. Hes not someone you want bogged down with defensive duties, nor is he able to dictate the game from central midfield because he lacks the close control, technique, and passing required for that area of the pitch. Push him out wide or play him behind Rooney, since hes all about being a goal threat and driving towards goal, which he isnt able to do from central midfield.

 

Lampard is too slow and limited technically for that level. Hes merely an example of how some foreign players have improved some English players' game - hed be s*** without the likes of Makelele, Essien, etc, doing everything in central midfield so he can concentrate on popping up in the box and scoring goals for Chelsea.

 

Beckham is a good player against crap to average teams, but hes frequently been utterly mediocre in the finals of the major championships. Why persist with a guaranteed loser, someone who you can bet your marbles on will pull a dissappearing act when it comes to the crunch games, as proven by previous tournaments?

 

Move on from these two and focus on Gerrard out of that trio - I count them together because theyre all players who prefer to play a 50 yard through ball (rather than pass and move) if they get the chance to since they feel the need to live up to their reputations and impose themselves on the game, and having more than one of that type of player is too much.

 

I would like to see a central midfield where Hargreaves is the first name on the sheet, followed by the likes of Carrick, Barry, etc. Not exactly glamorous players, but the best international teams dont have them in those positions - Portugal for example have made do with Costinha and Maniche, Brazil with Gilberto Silva and Ze Roberto/Emerson/Mineiro, France with Makelele and Vieira, Argentina with Cambiasso and Mascherano. None of them are "match winners" or 15+ goal scoring midfielders, as Gerrard and Lampard are, but theyre all tidy players who specialise in playing in the middle of the pitch as opposed to the last third.

 

Then, build around that hard working, solid central midfield by adding a mixture of flair, pace, creativity, and goals, in the attacking positions. Maybe England lack the creative midfielder (big shame Scholes retired), but we have the rest - Rooney (goals), Young (pace), Gerrard (goals), SWP (flair), Dyer (pace), etc. Have them all interchanging and playing wherever they want as opposed to just jogging around in defined positions - theres no reason why any of them cant do that, most of them do it at club level anyway. Thats essentially the same system that other teams use, particularly the ones who play a passing game on the deck, and I cant for the life of me see why England cant do the same, other than feeling the need to fit all the big names into the team (Lampard, Gerrard, Owen, Beckham, etc).

[sicsfingeredmong]

TBH Keane was neither a s*** player or had a huge ego. He's just abit of a nutcase, an honest one at that.

 

Couldn't agree more with the bold section being the main source of agreement, although there are some whose moral settings point toward the Northern most pole will dismiss your remark ie. most likely those who cried out that "Bellamy had disgraced the club & had to go" when he called a Souness a prick on national television after he was substituted for non-football reasons.

 

As a leader who said it 'how it was" during his captainship at United he made our own so-called Captain Fantastic -  ie . one who even until the very end fully endorsed a recent coaching regime which threatened to send the club to the cleaners -  look like a pale shadow in this regard.

[Benwell Lad]

Keane is like a drunken scotsman standing in a pub slagging off everything English, in short a knacker [and even a racist if the PC brigade pushed the point further, but I suspect they won't or won't even see the point]

 

However, his standards of football are high, borne out of the arrogance of being a top player himself. No bad thing, but maybe a weakness as a manager. We will see.

 

I'm reading on with this thread as it seems quite interesting  .........

 

He is certainly becoming one of football's cheap "rent a quotes" and his sliminess seems to be on the increase.

As Harry said when Quinn started slagging off Pompey pre season they should mind their own feckin business.

 

Even if what Keen said was true it's a bit rich coming from a guy whose own club  provides a few "pretty average" players to an underperforming Ireland team.

Also wasn't this the very guy who walked out on his own country at a crucial stage of a world cup in the days when they WERE actually good enough to qualify ?

The slimy hypocrite should keep his gob shut and concentrate on trying to avoid relegation with some of his own s*** players.

[Nobody]

Very good post tmonkey!

[Parky]

I would like to see Lampard and Beckham dropped entirely from the squad, and Gerrard pushed out from the central midfield births.

 

Gerrard lacks the required game for central midfield. Hes not someone you want bogged down with defensive duties, nor is he able to dictate the game from central midfield because he lacks the close control, technique, and passing required for that area of the pitch. Push him out wide or play him behind Rooney, since hes all about being a goal threat and driving towards goal, which he isnt able to do from central midfield.

 

Lampard is too slow and limited technically for that level. Hes merely an example of how some foreign players have improved some English players' game - hed be s*** without the likes of Makelele, Essien, etc, doing everything in central midfield so he can concentrate on popping up in the box and scoring goals for Chelsea.

 

Beckham is a good player against crap to average teams, but hes frequently been utterly mediocre in the finals of the major championships. Why persist with a guaranteed loser, someone who you can bet your marbles on will pull a dissappearing act when it comes to the crunch games, as proven by previous tournaments?

 

Move on from these two and focus on Gerrard out of that trio - I count them together because theyre all players who prefer to play a 50 yard through ball (rather than pass and move) if they get the chance to since they feel the need to live up to their reputations and impose themselves on the game, and having more than one of that type of player is too much.

 

I would like to see a central midfield where Hargreaves is the first name on the sheet, followed by the likes of Carrick, Barry, etc. Not exactly glamorous players, but the best international teams dont have them in those positions - Portugal for example have made do with Costinha and Maniche, Brazil with Gilberto Silva and Ze Roberto/Emerson/Mineiro, France with Makelele and Vieira, Argentina with Cambiasso and Mascherano. None of them are "match winners" or 15+ goal scoring midfielders, as Gerrard and Lampard are, but theyre all tidy players who specialise in playing in the middle of the pitch as opposed to the last third.

 

Then, build around that hard working, solid central midfield by adding a mixture of flair, pace, creativity, and goals, in the attacking positions. Maybe England lack the creative midfielder (big shame Scholes retired), but we have the rest - Rooney (goals), Young (pace), Gerrard (goals), SWP (flair), Dyer (pace), etc. Have them all interchanging and playing wherever they want as opposed to just jogging around in defined positions - theres no reason why any of them cant do that, most of them do it at club level anyway. Thats essentially the same system that other teams use, particularly the ones who play a passing game on the deck, and I cant for the life of me see why England cant do the same, other than feeling the need to fit all the big names into the team (Lampard, Gerrard, Owen, Beckham, etc).

 

 

                    Rooney

Young                              SWP

 

 

                  Gerrard

 

    Hargreaves    Carrick

 

Cole    Ferdy    Terry      Micah   

[ChezGiven]

The point is, German players have much better tactical sense than English players. They are also much more versatile,

like Lahm, Marcel Jansen, Borowski, etc. Klose and Ballack are world class performers with very balanced abilities as well.

 

It is damn true that in terms of technique, or individual ability, England isn't that far from Germany, or you can say they're the same I don't care.

But football is more than an individual game. The real problem of English players is, they couldn't adjust to any tactical changes and can only perform well when the team's tactics are building around them. For example, Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham, Owen...nearly all of your attacking players are "core" players rather than "squad" players. It is not that all core players in the world couldn't play well with each other, but England's exceptional -  the over emphasis on physical ability and attractiveness of individual effort but not teamwork. The players simply don't have the mental to accompany each other.

 

In this sense it is correct to say they are shit players. A player who could only perform under restricted circumstances can hardly be classified as "excellent players", eh?

Believe it or don't, the English players in international games do play like Luque in Newcastle. He is shit players right?

 

Actually I don't think England can be compared with Germany in international level. Check their past records in the previous 20 years, they are hardly in the same level. Such kinda comparison is already an overrated action imo. Bashing expected but this' what the other countries believe, take it or shit on it as you like.

 

Nah.

 

Disagree with all of that and i think its totally facile to knock the players after going out of the qualifiers. The manager was incompetent, the players are decent players and fit into numerous systems at Man U, Chelsea, Liverpool etc. That basic observation sort of contradicts everything you said. The point you are trying to make is that the manager was so poor he couldnt understand or communicate the best system for the players. Their club managers dont seem to have this problem, hence the quantity of british clubs and players at the business end of the CL.

 

You do quite rightfully compare the records of Germany and England at international level in the last 20 years. However, under Sven we were largely better than you, under Venables about the same. Apart from them two, the last time we had a decent manager (Robson) you lot arguably had better players. Imo obviously.

 

 

[merlin]

The point is, German players have much better tactical sense than English players. They are also much more versatile,

like Lahm, Marcel Jansen, Borowski, etc. Klose and Ballack are world class performers with very balanced abilities as well.

 

It is damn true that in terms of technique, or individual ability, England isn't that far from Germany, or you can say they're the same I don't care.

But football is more than an individual game. The real problem of English players is, they couldn't adjust to any tactical changes and can only perform well when the team's tactics are building around them. For example, Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham, Owen...nearly all of your attacking players are "core" players rather than "squad" players. It is not that all core players in the world couldn't play well with each other, but England's exceptional -  the over emphasis on physical ability and attractiveness of individual effort but not teamwork. The players simply don't have the mental to accompany each other.

 

In this sense it is correct to say they are s*** players. A player who could only perform under restricted circumstances can hardly be classified as "excellent players", eh?

Believe it or don't, the English players in international games do play like Luque in Newcastle. He is s*** players right?

 

Actually I don't think England can be compared with Germany in international level. Check their past records in the previous 20 years, they are hardly in the same level. Such kinda comparison is already an overrated action imo. Bashing expected but this' what the other countries believe, take it or s*** on it as you like.

 

Back in 1992, just after SJH had fully taken over at SJP, the Magpie Group were invited to lunch in order to meet KK and McDermott ; I was sat next to KK at lunch, and asked him, as someone who had played in Germany, what the main difference between English & German players was..

 

KK told me that the Germans were prepared to come back in afternoons VOLUNTARILY and work at their own weaknesses, whereas modern English players had to be compelled or they would go to play golf, see to their respective businesses(if they had one)etc, etc.

In other words, most(not all)English players only wanted to train for half a day and clear off for the rest..

As players go on to be coaches/managers, maybe this is why this attitude is so common - it is passed on down the line(PLUS - the Players' Union has too much power, and the players are too well-paid).

 

However, in the case of the current England team, the manager was clearly never up to the job and should not have had it in the first place.

[Isegrim]

The point is, German players have much better tactical sense than English players. They are also much more versatile,

like Lahm, Marcel Jansen, Borowski, etc. Klose and Ballack are world class performers with very balanced abilities as well.

 

It is damn true that in terms of technique, or individual ability, England isn't that far from Germany, or you can say they're the same I don't care.

But football is more than an individual game. The real problem of English players is, they couldn't adjust to any tactical changes and can only perform well when the team's tactics are building around them. For example, Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham, Owen...nearly all of your attacking players are "core" players rather than "squad" players. It is not that all core players in the world couldn't play well with each other, but England's exceptional -  the over emphasis on physical ability and attractiveness of individual effort but not teamwork. The players simply don't have the mental to accompany each other.

 

In this sense it is correct to say they are s*** players. A player who could only perform under restricted circumstances can hardly be classified as "excellent players", eh?

Believe it or don't, the English players in international games do play like Luque in Newcastle. He is s*** players right?

 

Actually I don't think England can be compared with Germany in international level. Check their past records in the previous 20 years, they are hardly in the same level. Such kinda comparison is already an overrated action imo. Bashing expected but this' what the other countries believe, take it or s*** on it as you like.

 

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.

[Taylor Swift]

Do it like I do it in Pro Evo

 

Owen

Rooney Cole/SWP

 

Gerrard Lampard

 

Hargreaves Barry/Carrick

 

Andy's mate #1 Andy Andy's mate #2

 

Edited just for you Andrew.

[Andy]

We'd probably struggle without a defence.

[Cronky]

The point is, German players have much better tactical sense than English players. They are also much more versatile,

like Lahm, Marcel Jansen, Borowski, etc. Klose and Ballack are world class performers with very balanced abilities as well.

 

It is damn true that in terms of technique, or individual ability, England isn't that far from Germany, or you can say they're the same I don't care.

But football is more than an individual game. The real problem of English players is, they couldn't adjust to any tactical changes and can only perform well when the team's tactics are building around them. For example, Gerrard, Lampard, Beckham, Owen...nearly all of your attacking players are "core" players rather than "squad" players. It is not that all core players in the world couldn't play well with each other, but England's exceptional -  the over emphasis on physical ability and attractiveness of individual effort but not teamwork. The players simply don't have the mental to accompany each other.

 

In this sense it is correct to say they are s*** players. A player who could only perform under restricted circumstances can hardly be classified as "excellent players", eh?

Believe it or don't, the English players in international games do play like Luque in Newcastle. He is s*** players right?

 

Actually I don't think England can be compared with Germany in international level. Check their past records in the previous 20 years, they are hardly in the same level. Such kinda comparison is already an overrated action imo. Bashing expected but this' what the other countries believe, take it or s*** on it as you like.

 

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.

 

 

[Keefaz]

Bobyule has a point, but I don't think it's down to technique or ability. It's 99% to do with confidence and Rooney is one of a very few English players who has confidence in his own ability. I think the players have been inculcated with 'CAN'T LOSE' mentality. We're afraid to play and express ourselves. Someone like Rio Ferdinand has excellent technique for a CB and there's no need to hoof the ball miles down the pitch when you have someone with his ability on the ball. Similarly, mildfielders hiding when a defender is looking for options is symptomatic of a lack of confidence and belief in either yourself or your team-mates.

[SEMTEX]

Which ones are s***? please tell.

 

Frank Lampard at international level.  Stroling around the pitch with the cleanest kit.

 

 

tbh, according to BBCs 'how far did the useless lumps of shit run', Frank Lampard covered more distance than Stevie G.

 

 

[ohmelads]

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 agree. People who say we lack the quality players to at least be competitive in major tournaments are looking for excuses and wallowing in their own self-pity. Germany were awful a few years back, and they only got to the final in 2002 through the easiest run you could ask for. Paraguay, USA, and S.Korea were all that stood between them and the final in the knockout stages and it papered over the cracks. Two years later in Euro 2004 Germany failed to get out of the group stage or even register a win. As my German friend said, he'd rather they hadn't qualified for Euro 2004 than embarrass themselves. And yet by 2006, in just two short years, Germany were gaining widespread praise for the way they went about their football.

 

Far too much has been said about the individuals, and how we have a deep-rooted problem with football in this country. Bollocks. We've got people talking about the lack of technique, the pace of our game and the size of 10-year old's pitches. The current European champions are Greece for christ sake. In recent history we have only come up a bit short of our potential IMO, we are not the best footballing nation in the world, not even the second or third best, so you have to say that anything beyond the quarter finals of a world cup is an achievement. We got there in 2002 and lost to Brazil, the winners. We reached the quarters of Euro 2004 but lost to the hosts and finalists, Portugal, on penalties. In 1998 we fell just short of the quarters on penalties to Argentina. These are not poor teams. 1994 was an embarrassment as was 2000 and as 2008 will be, but Germany have shown things can be turned around reasonably quickly with the right man at the helm and the desire for change.

 

The talk about deep-rooted problems with football in England are just melodramatics from overzealous journalists, it's easy to spout that sort of crap after a setback. The problem for me lie with tactics and team selection, not the quality of our footballers. Football is a team game and the team hasn't been performing, but it seems a lot of people are having a tantrum and saying none of our players are good enough to compete with the likes of Croatia.