Looking at the respective team line-ups and the amount of experience in the Dutch side I expected a rout. Thought England did very well to only lose 3-2. All credit to Pearce and Scotty.
I find it a little strange that Pearce says he doesn't have the experience - 6 years in charge of the under 21's.
I think it was all a little bit naive last night. First on Pearce's part, I know he was limited by injuries/wihdrawls etc. but that was a too inexperienced side/squad that was selected, yes it is nice seeing fresh players come into the squad and even everyone's favourite England manager Capello recognised the young players needed to be given a chance however he also realised that to give those youngsters a decent chance at that level you do need som eperienced heads around. Most of this wa shown by the defending last night, again all very naive.
But overall I think they did ok, and also let's not kid ourselves, there are some decent players in that dutch side but "one of the world's best" as quoted in the Guardian, well I guess if by one of the world's best we mean better than England and in the top 10 in the world I would agree but I would fancy a number of European teams are well above them.
Still decent enough performance and hopefully Rodney is right about the media/public not hyping our chances this summer but expect all that to change if Mr wheeler dealer himself gets put in charge before then.
I think it was all a little bit naive last night. First on Pearce's part, I know he was limited by injuries/wihdrawls etc. but that was a too inexperienced side/squad that was selected, yes it is nice seeing fresh players come into the squad and even everyone's favourite England manager Capello recognised the young players needed to be given a chance however he also realised that to give those youngsters a decent chance at that level you do need som eperienced heads around. Most of this wa shown by the defending last night, again all very naive.
But overall I think they did ok, and also let's not kid ourselves, there are some decent players in that dutch side but "one of the world's best" as quoted in the Guardian, well I guess if by one of the world's best we mean better than England and in the top 10 in the world I would agree but I would fancy a number of European teams are well above them.
Still decent enough performance and hopefully Rodney is right about the media/public not hyping our chances this summer but expect all that to change if Mr wheeler dealer himself gets put in charge before then.
Getting to a WC final 18 months ago would qualify then as being pretty good in my book but each to their own I suppose.
Parker had an outstanding first half and really lead the side but for the last half hour he was absolutely shattered and just went into hiding. Right decision to make him Captain though. Gerrard sent a few Hollywood balls off the pitch and then went off injured.
Thought the young internatioanally inexperienced team were outclassed by a first choice dutch side but they showed more character than an England side for years.
Yep. I do think the Dutch were playing within themselves though, in the first half especially. I thought Parker was outstanding and definitely MOM.Should keep the armband, Screw the old guard. Downing impressed me a lot more than when I'd seen him on tele. I really enjoyed my first new Wembley experience. Was sat just behind Tubes from Soccer AM. Thought you'd like to know ;-)
Looking forward to the first tournament in memory where we can go in without the media frenzy hyping us up to be world beaters.
Don't count on it Rodders. I fully expect our media to really crank up the hype as it gets nearer
Anyone ever wonder how these players are world beaters for their clubs week in week out... ...Put on an England shirt and they look very average.
Lamps & Gerrard particularly, 5 years ago they were arguably two of the best midfielders in the world scoring double figures and taking the Champions League by storm, but still looked dull for England under all the Managers!
Yeah the media circus is inevitible i suppose six but hopefully even the dimmest wont buy the hype this time before glumly throwing their newly purchased red and white wigs and face paint back in the cupboard until the next bandwagon rolls into town.
BA, as I wrote that I knew someone would mention the WC final. Let me respond with how "unhappy" the Dutch people were that their team played such bad football in that tournament and still managed to get to the final. Admittedly I think everyone of us would take that. I think we can all agree Spain are by far the best European side at the moment, my order after that would be Germany, France and probably Italy slightly above Holland. Throw into the mix some of the South American's, I would fancy Brazil up around the top, Argentina probably just behind France and then Uruguay possibly ahead of Holland given how well they have played and finished in recent tournaments.
I make them about 8th, so if we are talking about the 8th best team out of 100 nations or so then yes a very good side, if we are tlaking about serious contenders for a championship, not for me I'm afraid.
Yeah the media circus is inevitible i suppose six but hopefully even the dimmest wont buy the hype this time before glumly throwing their newly purchased red and white wigs and face paint back in the cupboard until the next bandwagon rolls into town.
Anyone ever wonder how these players are world beaters for their clubs week in week out... ...Put on an England shirt and they look very average.
Lamps & Gerrard particularly, 5 years ago they were arguably two of the best midfielders in the world scoring double figures and taking the Champions League by storm, but still looked dull for England under all the Managers!
The problem is that they're not all world beaters and those that are, are in teams with other foreign world beaters.
I was going to trot out the excuse that we're a small country but how large is Holland?
Anyone ever wonder how these players are world beaters for their clubs week in week out... ...Put on an England shirt and they look very average.
Lamps & Gerrard particularly, 5 years ago they were arguably two of the best midfielders in the world scoring double figures and taking the Champions League by storm, but still looked dull for England under all the Managers!
The problem is that they're not all world beaters and those that are, are in teams with other foreign world beaters.
I was going to trot out the excuse that we're a small country but how large is Holland?
I'm reading an interesting book at the moment called 'Why England lose', it's good if you like your stats and looking for trends in things that are linked to success in sport. Borrows heavily from Moneyball. One of the things they suggest for a succesful international team is indeed population e.g. Brazil but other more important factors are GDP per capita and probably most importantly footballing history, so the more international games a country has played the better they are.
I would guess in population terms we are alightly bigger than Holland and our GDP per capita is higher but traditionally Holland have always been a stronger footballing nation.
Edit: just looked and we have 60m people compared to Holland's 18m but they have a higher GDP per capita.
Anyone ever wonder how these players are world beaters for their clubs week in week out... ...Put on an England shirt and they look very average.
Lamps & Gerrard particularly, 5 years ago they were arguably two of the best midfielders in the world scoring double figures and taking the Champions League by storm, but still looked dull for England under all the Managers!
The problem is that they're not all world beaters and those that are, are in teams with other foreign world beaters.
I was going to trot out the excuse that we're a small country but how large is Holland?
I'm reading an interesting book at the moment called 'Why England lose', it's good if you like your stats and looking for trends in things that are linked to success in sport. Borrows heavily from Moneyball. One of the things they suggest for a succesful international team is indeed population e.g. Brazil but other more important factors are GDP per capita and probably most importantly footballing history, so the more international games a country has played the better they are. .
How do they explain Greece and Denmark winning the Euros?
Anyone ever wonder how these players are world beaters for their clubs week in week out... ...Put on an England shirt and they look very average.
Lamps & Gerrard particularly, 5 years ago they were arguably two of the best midfielders in the world scoring double figures and taking the Champions League by storm, but still looked dull for England under all the Managers!
The problem is that they're not all world beaters and those that are, are in teams with other foreign world beaters.
I was going to trot out the excuse that we're a small country but how large is Holland?
But Chelsea and Liverpool of five years ago, their best players were English, Terry, Cole, Lampard or Gerrard, Carragher etc.
Both Denmark and Greece have been playing international football since the early 1900's so it's not like they are a new team to the international football scene. Denmark also have the 2nd highest GDP per capita and Greece at the time would have been around 30th in the world (obviously has changed a lot since then). Luck also plays a big part in winning any tournament, for example Denmark were lucky to even be involved in that tournament. So I guess there are exceptions to ever rule ;-)
Great stuff from my old favourite Alan Green last night on 5Live.... They were talking (Agian! About the captaincy issue ZZZzzzzzz) and he said that how could you have Parker as captain as he would not be in Englands 1sXI if all available. Well Alan, which qualified English player could do a better job than Parker in that posistion? Unfortunately no one asked him.
Both Denmark and Greece have been playing international football since the early 1900's so it's not like they are a new team to the international football scene. Denmark also have the 2nd highest GDP per capita and Greece at the time would have been around 30th in the world (obviously has changed a lot since then). Luck also plays a big part in winning any tournament, for example Denmark were lucky to even be involved in that tournament. So I guess there are exceptions to ever rule ;-)
Cheers, sounds an interesting book so will look it up.
sorry if its not fashionable but I firmly believe cream will rise to the top, and simply put we do not enough world class players to compete at the top level - any sucess bearing that in mind will be down to a minor miracle or very very special manager, but given all the egos involved and the expectations/media etc I doubt we could ever do a Greece. I don't believe all this stuff about blooding players, and if you do too many its just a waste as they get thumped. It works a la Michael Owen, if you bring them in with experienced players alongside. there you go my two penneth
Seeing the relative inexperience of the team and the fact that it didn't really matter if we won or lost I don't think Pearce was naive at all. He would have learned a lot of useful lessons about a number of players which has to be the point of the exercise. I'd give him the job for the Euros now and have done with all the speculation.
How do successive managers keep picking Gerrard? He gave the ball away at least 4 times last night and played one hospital pass in his 30 minute cameo. Gone are the days he used to charge into gaps with pace and he rarely scores goals these days. A busted flush.
I see Jonjo only came on as a sub for U21s, last night - does Pearce or his sucessor agree with Dalglish (whose choice must be influenced by their relative fees paid) that Henderson is better than Shelvey?
Agree with Muttley and Addicted except that the defending on the first goal was dreadful. Robben's run and finish were great but should a dangerous player be able to run 50m through the middle of the park without being challenged? That's schoolboy defending.
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/england/9114757/Scott-Parker-shows-qualities-that-earned-him-England-captains-armband-against-Holland.html
I find it a little strange that Pearce says he doesn't have the experience - 6 years in charge of the under 21's.
But overall I think they did ok, and also let's not kid ourselves, there are some decent players in that dutch side but "one of the world's best" as quoted in the Guardian, well I guess if by one of the world's best we mean better than England and in the top 10 in the world I would agree but I would fancy a number of European teams are well above them.
Still decent enough performance and hopefully Rodney is right about the media/public not hyping our chances this summer but expect all that to change if Mr wheeler dealer himself gets put in charge before then.
I do think the Dutch were playing within themselves though, in the first half especially.
I thought Parker was outstanding and definitely MOM.Should keep the armband, Screw the old guard.
Downing impressed me a lot more than when I'd seen him on tele.
I really enjoyed my first new Wembley experience.
Was sat just behind Tubes from Soccer AM. Thought you'd like to know ;-)
Don't count on it Rodders. I fully expect our media to really crank up the hype as it gets nearer
...Put on an England shirt and they look very average.
Lamps & Gerrard particularly, 5 years ago they were arguably two of the best midfielders in the world scoring double figures and taking the Champions League by storm, but still looked dull for England under all the Managers!
I make them about 8th, so if we are talking about the 8th best team out of 100 nations or so then yes a very good side, if we are tlaking about serious contenders for a championship, not for me I'm afraid.
I was going to trot out the excuse that we're a small country but how large is Holland?
I would guess in population terms we are alightly bigger than Holland and our GDP per capita is higher but traditionally Holland have always been a stronger footballing nation.
Edit: just looked and we have 60m people compared to Holland's 18m but they have a higher GDP per capita.
Well Alan, which qualified English player could do a better job than Parker in that posistion? Unfortunately no one asked him.
We wont win the euros but if we play like that we'll do ok. Better 2-3 than 0-1
I see Jonjo only came on as a sub for U21s, last night - does Pearce or his sucessor agree with Dalglish (whose choice must be influenced by their relative fees paid) that Henderson is better than Shelvey?
Also one of ours was offside so I think that is more of an unlucky goal than a deflection.
It looked like when Holland wanted to score they could.
England have a long long way to go.
We just don't seem to have a player like Robben and Sjneider who are world class players.
Joe Hart is probably the only player who is world class.
Rooney is near to it but not when playing for England.
Players like Parker and Richards are very very good players but not world class.
And the rest are just good with some just average.
It's not enough to win against the top teams who have these world class players who can play that killer ball or score that magical goal.