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

[ChezGiven]

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 disgraceful performances, we were not beaten by poor teams. 1994 was an embarrassment 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.

 

and melodramatic posters on here too.

 

Spot on ohm.

[Nobody]

Aye, canny post ohmelads, spot on as always!

[johnnypd]

the problem with the above theory is the people who talk of deep rooted problems have been saying it for years, even when we've done relatively well. it is far from being a knee-jerk reaction to failure. if you look back at what people like bobyule, tmonkey and i have been saying, it is pretty consistent. one of my earliest football memories was watching england play, and asking my dad why the other country was allowed more players than us, and him telling me both sides had the same amount. now i know that it was simply that the foreigners had better movement, passing and technique than our lot, infinitely more time on the ball. when arguably your best player in gerrard, has a first touch worse than random no-name journeymen from obscure corners of eastern europe, you know something is up.

 

it's not to say we can't go on and do well, but to do so we have to have a top manager who understands our flaws and plays to our strengths. sven's answer was putting all our best talent out there, hoping our (pretty good) defence would hold and the individuals would do the rest of the job. mcclaren, i'm not sure he had a plan. tbh. greece had a very mediocre side in 2004, full of big burly defensive players like the 6ft 5in dellas or katsouranis, strong gritty tacklers like zagorakis, tactically aware midfielders who can dictate tempo like basinas, a livewire in stelios and a big fuck off centre-forward in charisteas. even their more talented players like seitaridis were big and strong. so they played an incredibly slow and defensive type of football, full of long-balls, set-pieces, long throw ins, strong tackles, solid positioning, shoulder barges and so on, a bit like bolton under big sam actually, and it paid off. that is not to say greece, or bolton, are a good footballing side/nation, they're not they just had a coach that suited them and had a clear vision of how to get the best out of the extremely limited resources. that people are holding them up as some kind of example to follow imo shows that we're not a top footballing nation, that we're not good enough to play on our own terms cos countries of only 4m people will take the piss out of us on a technical level. but that is the reality of the situation sadly.

 

it's not even as if we don't have talent, we do, probably more natural ability than a country like spain, and certainly more than the likes of portugal or the netherlands. but we're not getting the best out of it, a lot of our midfielders can't even do the basics, our defenders are more comfortable hoofing it up than playing it out, our forwards are very direct rather than able to pull off something different or unexpected. there are exceptions, most notably Rio, Scholes and Rooney, who i'd say are the only english players with technical ability to match the best you get in italy, spain, argentina and so on, as well as being world-class players. you could arguably throw gary neville into that batch. funny how they're all man utd players. there's more who have a little of that but aren't top talents and have other weaknesses - hargreaves, carrick, barry, beckham, crouch, defoe. then there's players who are very lacking at that level as their faults are more exposed- gerrard, lampard, terry, joe cole and so on. i'm not writing those players off, just that they need to be surrounded with players who can do other jobs for them and they're not really going to get that with england. players like campbell and owen get by alright tho, cos they have some exceptional qualities like brute strength or goalpoaching. ironically the one area in which england excel is athletically, we have pace in abundance and you think we'd utilise it but we rarely do. our midfield the other night had only SWP with any real pace and he was subbed at HT for the one-paced beckham! again not saying we cannot compete, as the kind of talent we have means we can go and steamroller lesser nations when we play as a team. up against good technical sides however we'll usually look pretty clueless and get dominated in general play.

 

none of this is a problem at club level because our league has so many foreigners who mask our weaknesses and are there to provide something very different to what english players can do. at international level not only are all these foreigners, the likes of makelele, mikel, mascherano and alonso, not there to help out gerrard or lampard, but the style of football demands that we play differently anyway. as tmonkey has said, gerrard and lampard are players who produce end product, capitalising on all the good work in midfield their "back-up" players do but unable to perform that good work themselves. but this means that there is little pressure on clubs to help reform the situation themselves. they need not home produce different kinds of players because they can buy them from abroad and rely on english players for aggression, athleticism, directness which we have in abundance rather than intelligence, subtlety, technique which we sorely lack. so solutions have to come from a national level by influencing grassroots footie even before the clubs get hold of players. playing on smaller pitches with weightier footballs for example, which is how young players are schooled in the netherlands or in brazil. tho apparently saying we can learn from other countries is melodramatic.

[NE5]

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.

 

2 good posts, and bobyule's as well.

 

However, the point - that I made anyway - is that if we want to improve from beyond being almost perennial quarter finalists, this is the area where we need to improve. Thats all. And it does start with smaller pitches, less space to work in, and developing the close balls skills, instant control etc etc. The point about Germany is correct, we in England have always been capable of matching the Germans for physical strength, athleticism and organisation - in fact we invariably do - but the Germans have had players over the vast majority of the last 40 years who ally these things with the instant technique, and the confidence in their ability which comes from knowing they are in control of the ball - the point that was made by Meenzer,  I think.

 

It can't change overnight. It will take time but I just cannot see it being done by the powers that be. As for being deep rooted, well it need not be, it wouldn't be if the changes were made to attempt to improve !!!!

 

Point to think about. This is now the 3rd time in recent memory England haven't qualified for a major tournament. When is the last time that Germany didn't qualify ?

 

 

[Cronky]

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.

 

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.

[johnnypd]

good post bob. i think we've already started addressing this problem at youth level tbh, boro have for a while used smaller pitches and futbol salao to train their young players. they've produced solid players we good technical ability. none of them are particularly talented, but they've done the best they can with limited natural resources down there, and the younger players coming through like poritt and johnson are supposed to be even better. man utd and spurs likewise have used wim coerver training methods for their youngsters, while the likes of micah richards, theo walcott and gareth bale have graduated from simon clifford's futsal school. arsenal too have started producing good english players in the past 3 or 4 years, tho most of them go elsewhere. wenger says he can see his team being all english in a few years as the quality at under 17 level is so good. also, using more technique-based training for youngsters isn't going to make them any less physical or less quick. the problem with picking the biggest lads when they're 12 is that they're not neccessarily going to have the same physical advantage when they're 21 when everyone has finished growing. pace is a bit different but youth scouts and coaches will always pick fast players and teaching them more technique based football isn't going to make them any slower. you can get a footballer down the gym aged 21 to toughen him up but you can't teach then him the basics of football.

[Guest Phil K]

He's right. We all know it.

 

Bit rich talking about egos tho. They dont get much bigger than that c***.

 

PS, yes he definetly said s***.

 

And he's spot on.

But missed grossly overpiad

[Isegrim]

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.

 

2 good posts, and bobyule's as well.

 

However, the point - that I made anyway - is that if we want to improve from beyond being almost perennial quarter finalists, this is the area where we need to improve. Thats all. And it does start with smaller pitches, less space to work in, and developing the close balls skills, instant control etc etc. The point about Germany is correct, we in England have always been capable of matching the Germans for physical strength, athleticism and organisation - in fact we invariably do - but the Germans have had players over the vast majority of the last 40 years who ally these things with the instant technique, and the confidence in their ability which comes from knowing they are in control of the ball - the point that was made by Meenzer,  I think.

 

It can't change overnight. It will take time but I just cannot see it being done by the powers that be. As for being deep rooted, well it need not be, it wouldn't be if the changes were made to attempt to improve !!!!

 

Point to think about. This is now the 3rd time in recent memory England haven't qualified for a major tournament. When is the last time that Germany didn't qualify ?

 

Re: the last question: 1968 (and I had to look it up as it never came to my mind that there probably was a tournament we didn't qualify)

 

But after some awful performances at tournaments I always thought it actually might be for the better if Germany finally fail to qualify. German football was very much stuck in the 80s. I thought the only way to overcome this kind of traditionalism was a real failure. In the end we have to thank Hitzfeld for not taking the job and the German FA therefore going for a progressive solution. Klinsmann was a revelation. He brought in some new ideas, not too few stemming from his time in England actually. And although he got hunted out by the German tabloids int, the FA made sure to stick by his approach.

[ohmelads]

Johnnypd you made some good points there but perhaps the most interesting was about us learning from Brazil. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that. There is a great deal of soul searching going on at the moment and it is interesting to note that while many here are talking about putting an emphasis on technique over physique at youth level, the Brazilians have been doing the opposite. Here's an excerpt from one of Tim Vickery's columns for the BBC which makes the point well.

 

"Trying to impose a pattern onto something as capricious as football results is a hazardous business. But perhaps one possible explanation can be found in the methodology Brazil have followed in recent years. Scared by the rise of the rise of the northern European game in the 60s and 70s - 'force football' as it was termed in Brazil - they sought to bulk up. Until recently former left-back Branco was co-ordinating Brazil's youth sides. He told me that right from the start of the process he and his team were looking for big, strong players. The idea was that if they could match the Europeans in physical terms, their technical advantage would tip the balance. The project has been very successful, though it could be argued that the aesthetic quality of their play has fallen as a consequence. But maybe the point has now been reached where Brazil's youth teams have a physical, and especially aerial, advantage against their South American neighbours. But they no longer have a sufficient technical advantage over the biggest and best sides from the rest of the world."

 

Another factor to consider is that the Brazilians are increasingly looking at physique over technique because they can make good money exporting their players to wealthy European clubs. Notice how few Brazilian players have succeeded in the Premier League, because traditionally they haven't handled the conditions or the pace and physicality of the game. Remember Kleberson? Clubs in both England and Brazil are looking for players who have the pace and/or physique to handle football at the top level, though for very different reasons. We are not the only nation cherry-picking the stronger/taller/quicker kids from a very early age, the Brazilians are doing it as well.

[Keefaz]

From what I hear, the academies have already moved away from full-size pitches and you play on undersize pitches up to the age of 13 or so. However, this has only come about very recently so any of the perceived benefits will still take some time to filter up.

[ohmelads]

From what I hear, the academies have already moved away from full-size pitches and you play on undersize pitches up to the age of 13 or so. However, this has only come about very recently so any of the perceived benefits will still take some time to filter up.

 

A welcome change it true, but as Alex Ferguson made the point earlier today, I don't think our current issues are due to these sorts of grassroots problems nor indeed down to the current generation of players.

 

I don't think we'll ever match the Brazilians technically. They play football all of the time, every day, from the minute they can kick a ball. Many of them play without shoes, and play anywhere they can, it is a national obsession. English kids play barely a fraction of the amount of football they do, and as a result will always be behind. In order to overcome nations like these we need to focus on the business end of things IMO, namely tactics and organisation. I wasn't citing Greece as an example to follow, far from it, but rather an example of the sheer importance of tactics in international tournaments. If a nation as poor as Greece can go all the way it shows that technique is not the be all and end all. We need to recognise where we stand in world football and look to punch above our weight if we are ever to go all the way (IMO), because I don't see us ever outplaying the Brazilians or the Italians at their own style of football.

[Minhosa]

What were you saying about shit players Roy?

 

Management Lesson No.1; If it doesn't involve you keep your mouth shut you cock.

 

Management Lesson No.2; Only give the press a bite when you can use it to your own advantage.

[Rob]

[Liam Liam Liam O]

What were you saying about shit players Roy?

 

Management Lesson No.1; If it doesn't involve you keep your mouth shut you cock.

 

Management Lesson No.2; Only give the press a bite when you can use it to your own advantage.

 

Don't expect the press to pick him up on it

[Benwell Lad]

What were you saying about s*** players Roy?

 

Management Lesson No.1; If it doesn't involve you keep your mouth shut you cock.

 

Management Lesson No.2; Only give the press a bite when you can use it to your own advantage.

 

Wonder what MacLaren thinks about Sundlund's performance today ?

[Minhosa]

What were you saying about s*** players Roy?

 

Management Lesson No.1; If it doesn't involve you keep your mouth shut you cock.

 

Management Lesson No.2; Only give the press a bite when you can use it to your own advantage.

 

Wonder what MacLaren thinks about Sundlund's performance today ?

 

Maybe Roy should give him a bell and ask him.

 

The Wanker.