England

[ilikenewcastle]

1 hour ago, STM said:

We are sleep walking into a disaster in Qatar because of Gareths "never let me down", policy. Given the club form of Shaw, Maguire, Pickford at times, you can't expect them to continue to ride their luck in tournaments. 

 

Also, I get Mount is good but I don't understand what he offers above others. Surely given the fact you have 3 Man City attacking players, who are tuned into one another, you simply have to play them alongside Saka?

 

Front six of:

 

                              Henderson

         Bellingham

                                            Foden      

   Saka                                  Sterling/Grealish

                            Kane

 

I don't think there's anything wrong with picking players with a good international record even if their club form is nothing special. In fact, pretty much every other team does it (Giroud and Klose were regulars for the last 2 world champions despite not setting the world on fire for their clubs). Southgate overall has done a good job, but the manner of the defeats to Croatia and Italy will always annoy me and I fear that we'll see something similar this winter. I wonder how different the second half v Germany would have been in the Euros if Kane stuck that chance away before half time.

[Cronky]

7 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

It's utterly bizzare. I'd understand it if we'd had the players below 50 years ago, but it was literally the consistent generation before this one. The likes of Michael Carrick, Jermaine Defoe, Ledley King, and Jonathan Woodgate often couldn't get in that squad let alone the team, but the current England players are the best we've had in a lifetime? Laughable.

 

 

 

 

 

That's an interesting point. There are certainly some good individuals in that side, but it does beg the question of why they didn't function particularly well as a team. 

 

That midfield of Beckham, Lampard and Gerrard never worked well as a unit. Owen Hargreaves wasn't technically good enough, even for that anchor role. Terry didn't play as well for England as he did for Chelsea, Robinson and Neville weren't top class, Joe Cole never really made his mark at international level. We would go into tournaments with high expectations, but end up very disappointed. Not just be the results, but by the performances.

[The College Dropout]

What makes this squad so great is the depth of attacking talent. 
 

Emile Heskey and Darius Vassell went to Euros 2004.  Vassell came off the bench in the first half when Rooney got injured.  While Hargreaves replaced Gerrard, PHILLIP NEVILLE replaces Scholes. Around that time Crouch, Mills and Sinclair play frequently for England.  
 

at Euros 2020 Saka, Sancho, Rashford, Grealish and Henderson come off the bench for England. The step up in depth is crazy. 
 

 

[The Butcher]

9 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

It's utterly bizzare. I'd understand it if we'd had the players below 50 years ago, but it was literally the consistent generation before this one. The likes of Michael Carrick, Jermaine Defoe, Ledley King, and Jonathan Woodgate often couldn't get in that squad let alone the team, but the current England players are the best we've had in a lifetime? Laughable.

 

 

 

 

Too many playmakers and nowhere near enough pace in that side. 

[Kid Icarus]

Heskey was very good for England when he played with Owen.

 

Sven's other choices, especially Vassell, were ridiculed at the time because the likes of Wright-Phillips, Defoe, Ashton, Beattie, Smith, Woodgate, weren't picked or weren't available. Neville was a utility player, but was picked on reputation and Scholes could have easily been replaced with one of Dyer, Butt, or Joe Cole in that match.

 

This idea that after Sven's first choice XI he had no choice but to put poor players in just isn't true at all.

 

Sven was regularly criticised for his squad picks and substitutions precisely because of better players being available to him. He had his favourites and regularly chose the worse player because of who they played for.

 

Even besides all of that, of the back ups he did choose, the likes of 2004 Robinson, Bridge, Carragher, King, Butt, Dyer, and Hargreaves  would all be in with an excellent shout of making this England starting XI, never mind the squad.

[AJ9]

9 hours ago, Joey Linton said:

No mate, we're discussing our opinions on where things could potentially improve. That's what football forums are for. Discussion. 

Or…adding nothing of value to a “debate” that is currently running at the level of a taxi driver and his passenger. Same old tired arguments on repeat.

 

Anyway, I’ll do my bit to make sure this discussion gets back on track and pipe down. 

 

 

Edited March 28, 2022 by AJ9

[Kid Icarus]

Phil Neville for England was nearly always poor IIRC and his performance vs Romania sticks in the memory especially. At the same time it's easy to forget that he was actually good for quite a while when he went to Everton.

[RodneyCisse]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

Phil Neville for England was nearly always poor IIRC and his performance vs Romania sticks in the memory especially. At the same time it's easy to forget that he was actually good for quite a while when he went to Everton.

Ruined my family holiday in Lanzarote as an 11 year old.

[Yorkie]

That fucking penalty giveaway against Romania is still rage inducing. Such an insult after we'd done the hard part of recovering from that opening collapse against Portugal.

 

Think the only other time I was cliche 'kid's crying now' as an England fan was the throw-away against France in Euro 2004.

 

Was starting to lose it in WC06 and don't even think me mum and dad were watching by the time the pens were on. 

 

Then by 08 I'm pretty sure I just thought it was funny cos of all the dislikeable characters in the team and dugout.

 

Everything else between that and Southgate was varying shades of meh; I didn't mind Hodgson but didn't feel much when we went out. 

[Guest neesy111]

We were absolutely shite that euro 2000 tournament tbh.

[buzza]

The major complaints i have with Southgate´s selections are:

Pickford, he has had a pretty poor season so far and seems to have become much more error prone/lost confidence.

Maguire, way out of form and I have never believed the hype about him. The only good attacking trait he had was bringing the ball 15-20 yards straight out of defence, the rest was average, oh... and the size of his swede!

Shaw, was great at the euros but is struggling now.

Sterling, hardly ever plays for city but is a cert for england???

 

As for rice and phillips, I also think there are games where one defensive pivot is enough, he needs to be a bit more positive as we have a lot of attacking talent. perhaps a 4-1-4-1

[Kid Icarus]

6 minutes ago, buzza said:

The major complaints i have with Southgate´s selections are:

Pickford, he has had a pretty poor season so far and seems to have become much more error prone/lost confidence.

Maguire, way out of form and I have never believed the hype about him. The only good attacking trait he had was bringing the ball 15-20 yards straight out of defence, the rest was average, oh... and the size of his swede!

Shaw, was great at the euros but is struggling now.

Sterling, hardly ever plays for city but is a cert for england???

 

As for rice and phillips, I also think there are games where one defensive pivot is enough, he needs to be a bit more positive as we have a lot of attacking talent. perhaps a 4-1-4-1

 

Pickford has still never let England down
Maguire is England's all-time top scoring defender, he's scored 5 in his last 11 man
I think Shaw was maybe going to be replaced with Chilwell before his injury, but Shaw was my player of the tournament last year
Sterling is absolutely shit hot when he plays for England

Maguire especially is the most Jekyll and Hyde player when it comes to him playing for England or Man United, but the same applies to loads of them really.

 

 

Edited March 28, 2022 by Kid Icarus

[The College Dropout]

 

1 hour ago, Kid Icarus said:

Heskey was very good for England when he played with Owen.

 

Sven's other choices, especially Vassell, were ridiculed at the time because the likes of Wright-Phillips, Defoe, Ashton, Beattie, Smith, Woodgate, weren't picked or weren't available. Neville was a utility player, but was picked on reputation and Scholes could have easily been replaced with one of Dyer, Butt, or Joe Cole in that match.

 

This idea that after Sven's first choice XI he had no choice but to put poor players in just isn't true at all.

 

Sven was regularly criticised for his squad picks and substitutions precisely because of better players being available to him. He had his favourites and regularly chose the worse player because of who they played for.

 

Even besides all of that, of the back ups he did choose, the likes of 2004 Robinson, Bridge, Carragher, King, Butt, Dyer, and Hargreaves  would all be in with an excellent shout of making this England starting XI, never mind the squad.

By the same token - Maguire has been better for England than any of those fantastic centrebacks. Maguire has also managed to score the same amount of goals as Heskey did for England in less caps. 
 

With the other exception of Hargreaves and the central defenders, none of the others you listed make the squad.  
 

As great as Owen was for his era - you don’t get top class forwards as limited as him anymore. He would come off the bench now. 
 

and even for their era - Brazil, Argentina, Holland, Italy, Portugal, Germany & Spain had teams equally or more talented squads. where as today talent and performance wise these lot are right up there. 

[The College Dropout]

8 minutes ago, buzza said:

The major complaints i have with Southgate´s selections are:

Pickford, he has had a pretty poor season so far and seems to have become much more error prone/lost confidence.

Maguire, way out of form and I have never believed the hype about him. The only good attacking trait he had was bringing the ball 15-20 yards straight out of defence, the rest was average, oh... and the size of his swede!

Shaw, was great at the euros but is struggling now.

Sterling, hardly ever plays for city but is a cert for england???

 

As for rice and phillips, I also think there are games where one defensive pivot is enough, he needs to be a bit more positive as we have a lot of attacking talent. perhaps a 4-1-4-1

All of these have played well for England though.  Giroud, Podolski and Klose got picked for winning national teams due to national form when their club performances were poor. 
 

Sterling will likely play 40+ games for City this season. Hardly ever plays is simply not true. 

[Kid Icarus]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

 

By the same token - Maguire has been better for England than any of those fantastic centrebacks. Maguire has also managed to score the same amount of goals as Heskey did for England in less caps. 
 

With the other exception of Hargreaves and the central defenders, none of the others you listed make the squad.  
 

As great as Owen was for his era - you don’t get top class forwards as limited as him anymore. He would come off the bench now. 
 

and even for their era - Brazil, Argentina, Holland, Italy, Portugal, Germany & Spain had teams equally or more talented squads. where as today talent and performance wise these lot are right up there. 

 

By the same measure Maguire is atrocious for Man United, which is the entire point - that Southgate gets much more out of this England team than the sum of its parts. The players are nowhere near as good for their clubs as those players in 2004 were. 

 

The idea that Butt, Dyer, Bridge, and Robinson wouldn't make even make the England squad that was picked for the Euros is frankly laughable.

 

Butt was England's best player at the 2002 World Cup and a Man United regular, Dyer would easily get in as a central midfield back up at least, Robinson was a safer pair of hands at Spurs than Pickford has been at Everton, Bridge was considered massively unlucky to be stuck behind Ashley Cole in the pecking order.

 

As if pre-2020 anyone would be suggesting that they wouldn't have got in the squad ahead of the likes of Sam Johnstone, Ben White, Kalvin Phillips, Declan Rice or Dominic Calvert-Lewin, man.   England have done well and now suddenly for some people the sum of its parts are better than those in an England team who massivlly underachieved. The revisionism is on another level.

[Yorkie]

Yeah, the talk about the strength of the (still very strong) England squad is skewed or over-egged by the incredible depth in a couple of positions, namely full-back and wide forward; meanwhile there is a ready-made stick to beat Southgate with, in the form of "he should've played Chilwell/James/TAA/Sancho/Grealish/Foden/Rashford/DCL instead of Trippier/Shaw/Sterling/Saka/Kane," despite his preferences rarely/never letting him down. 

 

He's never found room to accommodate the litany of attackers waiting in the wings and has then been accused of being overly cautious/negative. I wouldn't even necessarily disagree that he's unadventurous, but it's nowt to do with his line-ups.

[The Prophet]

Yep, this squad is well short down to the spine of the team, namely GK, CB and CM.

[Joey Linton]

1 minute ago, The Prophet said:

Yep, this squad is well short down to the spine of the team, namely GK, CB and CM.

One top level goalscorer. 

[Yorkie]

There's nee meaningful alternative to Kane either. Southgate sticking with him despite starting the tournament pretty horribly was probably the most satisfying of the various middle fingers to everyone. Including me, btw, as I thought he should've been hooked against Germany.

[The Prophet]

I think Bellingham will solve a problem in the middle. It'd be decent of Abraham steps up as an alternative to Kane too.

 

 

Edited March 28, 2022 by The Prophet

[Cronky]

I know what I'm in for, but this would be my best XI from that old England side and the current one.

 

Pickford

James Ferdinand Maguire A.Cole

Phillips

Saka Gerrard Foden

Rooney

Kane

 

Saka and Foden to add that pace that the old England team lacked.

 

Terry didn't perform for England like he did for Chelsea. Maguire is having a hard time at the moment, but he'd be a good foil for Ferdinand, and is a real threat against continental defences from attacking set pieces.

[The College Dropout]

2 hours ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

By the same measure Maguire is atrocious for Man United, which is the entire point - that Southgate gets much more out of this England team than the sum of its parts. The players are nowhere near as good for their clubs as those players in 2004 were. 

 

The idea that Butt, Dyer, Bridge, and Robinson wouldn't make even make the England squad that was picked for the Euros is frankly laughable.

 

Butt was England's best player at the 2002 World Cup and a Man United regular, Dyer would easily get in as a central midfield back up at least, Robinson was a safer pair of hands at Spurs than Pickford has been at Everton, Bridge was considered massively unlucky to be stuck behind Ashley Cole in the pecking order.

 

As if pre-2020 anyone would be suggesting that they wouldn't have got in the squad ahead of the likes of Sam Johnstone, Ben White, Kalvin Phillips, Declan Rice or Dominic Calvert-Lewin, man.   England have done well and now suddenly for some people the sum of its parts are better than those in an England team who massivlly underachieved. The revisionism is on another level.

Maguire has had one bad season at Manchester United. He cost them £75m because he was excellent for Leicester & England for 2 years and he's been good for a couple seasons at Manchester United.

 

Robinson would be behind Pickford & Ramsdale. Dyer's not playing central midfield for England. 2004 Nicky Butt is done. Butt, Sinclair, Mills, past-it Seaman, Heskey up-top, 2002 squad was comparatively weak. Bridge doesn't get in ahead of Chilwell. Bridge was a good 4-4-2 fullback, he's not seeing Chilwell or capable of reaching the fat lads peak. From 2004 pick 2 CB's & 2CM's + Rooney & Cole. The rest don't start. In the squad I take most of the CB's, CM's, maybe Robinson as #3, Owen off the bench. The rest don't make the squad.

 

If he can avoid injuries and such. Declan Rice is going to be an excellent player.

[Kid Icarus]

7 minutes ago, Cronky said:

I know what I'm in for, but this would be my best XI from that old England side and the current one.

 

Pickford

James Ferdinand Maguire A.Cole

Phillips

Saka Gerrard Foden

Rooney

Kane

 

Saka and Foden to add that pace that the old England team lacked.

 

Terry didn't perform for England like he did for Chelsea. Maguire is having a hard time at the moment, but he'd be a good foil for Ferdinand, and is a real threat against continental defences from attacking set pieces.

 

In terms of how they've actually performed for England, I don't think there can be that much of an argument with that line-up. I'd go Walker over James and Sterling over Rooney or Saka or Foden. 

The key thing is Southgate and the overhaul overall though isn't it? If you were choosing those players over the ones that played for their clubs the argument would be much bigger and aside from Kane, Foden, Sterling, none of them would be getting in a combined XI 'on talent'

[Kid Icarus]

2 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Maguire has had one bad season at Manchester United. He cost them £75m because he was excellent for Leicester & England for 2 years and he's been good for a couple seasons at Manchester United.

 

Robinson would be behind Pickford & Ramsdale. Dyer's not playing central midfield for England. 2004 Nicky Butt is done. Butt, Sinclair, Mills, past-it Seaman, Heskey up-top, 2002 squad was comparatively weak. Bridge doesn't get in ahead of Chilwell. Bridge was a good 4-4-2 fullback, he's not seeing Chilwell or capable of reaching the fat lads peak. From 2004 pick 2 CB's & 2CM's + Rooney & Cole. The rest don't start. In the squad I take most of the CB's, CM's, maybe Robinson as #3, Owen off the bench. The rest don't make the squad.

 

If he can avoid injuries and such. Declan Rice is going to be an excellent player.

 

 Absolutely bonkers. Not even worth it at this point.

 

The sea-change in the way people think about the players in the current England squad should be a good thing. It should be good that they're now seemingly rated so highly.

 

It's just a shame that the team's achievements are being used as a way to excuse Southgate of his part in it and to big up the players while also reverse engineering away the talent from previous generations who were much more highly rated and were far better at their clubs. It's just weird and wrong. Totally mental. 

[McCormick]

Disagree completely. It may be lacking in some areas but this is definitely the strongest crop of talent England have ever produced.