England up to 6th best in world

Originally posted by mtthw
This is a strange, but common, way of simultaneously over- and under-rating England. 2002 - quarter final. 2004 - QF. 2006 - QF. They're pretty good results for a team you reckon shouldn't be anywhere near the world top 10.

1996? Semi-final. One round better. With home advantage (surely worth an extra round on average). It would have taken absolute ...[text shortened]...

Balanced opinions seems to be very hard to come across where England are concerned.


.

i said they be should be no better than 12th given the form of the past 4 years, that's still pretty decent.

they go into every major competition saying 'this is our year', when you expect to win it, is a qf place a good result? i don't think so. but maybe you're happy with englands mediocrity.

a semi final place at home - i agree it's probably worth an extra round and was tempted to say '90 but a semi final is a semi final imo. were into nitpicking with this one.

I'd agree there are issues, though. My own take on it is that English players tend to be very strong in some areas, weak in others (probably due to coaching at young ages). Club teams can offset the weaknesses by using overseas players who complement them, allowing the likes of Lampard and Gerrard to be very effective. England can't do that, giving them systematic weaknesses. Sometimes the corresponding strengths can mask them, but sometimes they can't - especially against the very best opposition

this is basically what i've been saying. I wouldn’t say “very” strong and wouldn’t use the word ‘probably’ in your brackets but other than that…

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Bayern Munich has ten German nationals in its squad as of last year - best team in Europe! best and most exciting team to watch in world cup - Germany! horsed England, horsed Argentina, got phased by Spain, but were a better team, should have won it. German football is light years ahead.

not the best team in europe, a team that was lucky to reach the cl final and was beaten by another lucky team who happened to be better than them on that night.

Originally posted by trev33
not the best team in europe, a team that was lucky to reach the cl final and was beaten by another lucky team who happened to be better than them on that night.

lucky, pfffft! Trev my friend, did they not thoroughly outclass the stars of the North? your beloved Man U and indeed were rather subdued by the Italians, but it is a learning experience, indeed who are we to fear? Barca? Madrid? Man Utd? Inter? Chelsea? Once Ribery and Robben are fit again, we shall be unstoppable, indeed do not the very names Muller, Schweinsteiger, Klose strike fear into the English hearts? muhahaha, your almost playing against the German national side with a few exceptional add ons!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
lucky, pfffft! Trev my friend, did they not thoroughly outclass the stars of the North? your beloved Man U and indeed were rather subdued by the Italians, but it is a learning experience, indeed who are we to fear? Barca? Madrid? Man Utd? Inter? Chelsea? Once Ribery and Robben are fit again, we shall be unstoppable, indeed do not the very names M ...[text shortened]... ? muhahaha, your almost playing against the German national side with a few exceptional add ons!

they were lucky against utd and beat a poor lyon side to reach the final, they do play some good football though but they're not the second best side in europe. lets see if they can do it again this year, then they'll get the credit they deserve. i'd say last year they were the 5th best team in europe behind barce, inter, chelsea and man utd in that order. i know inter beat barce but they're clearly the best side in europe at the moment, anything can happen in a match though - look at the siss against spain at the world cup.

Young English players must play. If necessary for the top teams. I noticed some 19 year old scored a wonder goal for Barca or Real the other day. He gets in the team and is allowed to play.

Screw EU rules and Bosmans, an FA directive should politely ask the big teams to play youngsters. If tribunals are going to screw over lesser teams for their acadamy players, then they should be playing in 50% of matches in the Premier.

Don't suck up all the talent in England and then suck it out of them in reserve leagues and then destroy their motivation by sending them out to the championship and beyond for games bcause there are 3 or 4 foreign players ahead of them.

Lets not have bigger clubs lecture football how their acadamies are better, yet they are not producing anything of the standard to compete at a world level (see Spain and Germany).

By all means, snap up the youngsters nice and cheap. But don't snap them at bargain prices and buy a so-so foreigner for 10 million in the same week to take their place in the side.

If these youngsters are good enough to interest a top 5 or 6 side, then they should be good enough to play in that side now - off the bench if necessary.

There used to be a risk in buying players. Would it be a good purchase, will it work out. Snapping them up for peanuts and perhaps playing them in three or four years negates that risk.

Get the youngsters playing. Agree paltry tribunal fees if that is your business model, but at least loan the players back to the clubs you are poaching from. Those players are good enough to play at the lower levels now, let them develop in competitive matches.

Why didn't England go further in the WC. Well a goalkeeping error certainly stopped us topping our group. For a while we competed against Germany. We should have avoided them as Beckenbaur stated, and had time to build confidence. A country with a great tradition of excellent goalkeepers is struggling to find a good home grown one, and it cost us with the worst error you are likely to see on the world stage.

Look at the U21 side. Pierce, the oft vaunted next manager of England, cannot see beyond the acadamies of Premier teams to pick the players. What about those playing in lower leagues but in first team games. Is he incompetent, arrogant or simply too lazy to do his job and go and watch these players. He'll get a free ticket, hospitality and he must have a budget to travel.

Get youngsters playing. Stop spending millions on overseas players.

Look at the German side. Probably a real challenge to Brasil in the next WC. All home grown, all playing in the Bundesliga, all in a rebuilt national team, overseen by a competent FA, and playing in a competitive league not dominated by the same moneyed teams.

Originally posted by trev33
they were lucky against utd and beat a poor lyon side to reach the final, they do play some good football though but they're not the second best side in europe. lets see if they can do it again this year, then they'll get the credit they deserve. i'd say last year they were the 5th best team in europe behind barce, inter, chelsea and man utd in that order. i ...[text shortened]... nt, anything can happen in a match though - look at the siss against spain at the world cup.

no way, have you seen Mullers goal against Roma? pure genius!

Originally posted by Hopster
Young English players must play. If necessary for the top teams. I noticed some 19 year old scored a wonder goal for Barca or Real the other day. He gets in the team and is allowed to play.

Screw EU rules and Bosmans, an FA directive should politely ask the big teams to play youngsters. If tribunals are going to screw over lesser teams for their acadamy ...[text shortened]... a competent FA, and playing in a competitive league not dominated by the same moneyed teams.

you just don't get it. the english young players aren't good enough not because they're not getting enough playing time at the top clubs, if they showed that they were good enough in training they'd play. if you can't do it in training against the class of player you're going to face in the first teams matches your not going to get picked. even for the last 10 mins of a 3-0 win to help you 'develop', they'd be no point. the problem, which I have said over and over, solely lays in the coaching mentality of kids. look at the technical ability of the -17 players from spain and germany in the next under 17 tournament and compare it to that of the british players, the spanish and german players (along with some of the s. american players and others) will be far technically superior to the british, the way they can control and pass they ball as individuals. not all of them obviously and it does depend on the talent of that years crop but generally speaking the other players will be much better technically. that doesn't mean they'll be a better team of course, there are other factors that determine what makes a good team. see ireland at the -19s in 1998.

the solution really is a simple one but the fa are to stupid to see it or to lazy to do anything about it. there needs to be a total coaching structure change of the british systems, starting at the youngest possible age. around 20k fifa pro licensed coaches teaching the german and spanish kids and only 2k english, it specks for itself.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
no way, have you seen Mullers goal against Roma? pure genius!

did you see the goal at the glentoran game? by your reasoning that makes them the best team in the world, seeing as it was the best goal you're ever going to see 😉

Here is my opinion:

1) Spain
2) Brazil
3) Germany
4) Argentina
5) The Netherlands
6) Uruguay
7) Ivory Coast (when Drogba is healthy and healthy Toures)
8) England
9) Paraguay
10) Japan

Originally posted by MrHand
Here is my opinion:

1) Spain
2) Brazil
3) Germany
4) Argentina
5) The Netherlands
6) Uruguay
7) Ivory Coast (when Drogba is healthy and healthy Toures)
8) England
9) Paraguay
10) Japan

so in your opinion the 7th best team in the world failed to get out of a wc group containing two teams outside of the top 10? right. with a thrid place and runners up in the african cup of nations (how did your 7th best team in the world fair in those tournaments with a fit drogba btw?) and a wc 1/4 place no where to be seen 🙄

plus, japan 10th? please.

If I'm honest, Japan isn't number 10, but based on their WC performance, I would put them as #11, behind Italy. I just hate Italiany football.

Regarding Ivory Coast, did you notice that I prefaced with a clause of healthy Drogba AND Toures? Particularly Drogba.

Regarding your reference to past performance with a healthy Drogba, African Cups and qualifying are notoriously precarious due to politics, corrupt officiating and poor coaching.

Admittedly, I am putting IC up there more on potential than actual performance though...I will concede that. Put Hiddink in charge of IC and I'd put them as top 5 with a healthy Drogba!

Sven is a handicap -- they would have been better off without a coach. 🙂

ok, here are the best teams in the world

1.Germany
2.Spain.
3.Brazil.
4.Argentina
5.Portugal.
6.Holland
7.Scotland
8.Uruguay
9.Ireland
10.Mexico
11.Ghana. . . .

254.England

I think some of the young English players in acadamies are fine talents. Then they get that class trained out of them.

They might not be good enough for the Premier League, but that is because the Premier is full of foreign players at the top of their game. If you go back to the last reasonably successful English team - 1996/2002 with the likes of Owen and Gascoine playing, there were far fewer foreign players. Teams were not fielding 9 foreign players as a norm. There were many Scandinavians and a few stars like Cantona, Zola, Bergkamp - and these were a real big deal.

The youngsters were good enough then.

While technically not the best, England youth teams do seem to put in a fair show of themselves in international tournaments. While we marvel at Spain etc., our youngsters battle to semi finals and the like. So, at 15/16/17 they are good enough. Then they are not good enough at 19/20.

So, yes we can get good coaches in and work on technical ability. But lets take a 4/6 year break in the wilderness and develop something for the future.

Thus this issue is what the overhyped Premier league is bringing to the game. It is bringing lots of money, lots of subsciption boxes, and very nice wages for players. Is it helping England perform on the world stage?

The question is what do people want. Footballers, managers, administrators, Sky, the media and the fans of the top clubs want it to continue at the expense of international success. And they influence and run the game.

The mindset change should have happened at the end of the South Africa. But no-one wanted it.

People have been saying that England aren't good enough technically since Hungary beat them 6-3, and we have produced good teams since then. In the 70's the English game was awash with technically exciting players - most teams had a superstar that could play, in both the top two divisions. Peter Taylor played for England while playing for a third tier team. Yet, these players failed to qualify for a WC despite their talents.

I feel that the money and prestige of the Premier League have to be sacrificed if we want to focus on the National team. It was thought that bringing in foreign talent would teach youngsters how to play the game, and thus English players would improve. What happens is when one foreign player goes another is bought to replace him.

The English players still play the same way - two decades later. Huff and puff and British Bulldog. Even the very best is of that style. Rooney/Gerrard. Lampard can have a good game for Chelsea, a great game even. But most know that week in week out, it is the foreign superstar alongside him that is pulling the strings and giving him the freedom to play his natural game. Without that player Lampard disappears for large periods in England games. He is out of his depth. The same can be said for Terry. Solid player with an international class centre back alongside him. When he has to be the internationl class centre back for England he is found wanting.

I live in a dream world. The vested interests will maintain the status quo. But if say Man City were to take the 20 million they spent on Jonny Foreigner and they took the 150,000 a week they are spending on his wages, and the put that into a program to invest in youth coaches and young talent - what fruit would it bring. If all the big clubs did it. Just one close season for starters. In July, just think that their squad does not need a new 10 million pound midfielder, they don't need to spend another 2 million in signing on fees and AGENTS fees. They could invest that money.

Across the board that adds up to an incredible sum of money. Maybe 100,000,000 in one close season. What could be achieved with that. Over a couple of years 5 top home grown players?

As an aside, I don't want to blame the big clubs for the problem.

But with the frankly poor administrators we have, they are the only solution.

Originally posted by Hopster
Get youngsters playing. Stop spending millions on overseas players.

Yes, but no. If you want your young players to play, first you must teach your young players to play. Not kick - play. It has been decades since there have been eleven Englishmen able to play at the same time. Finding eleven Englishmen able to kick is easy, finding a complete team able to actually play is impossible. And that starts at the very lowest level of coaching children.

Richard