So we have the under 17s winning a championship, yet the national side bows out without a win (so far).
Germany play 8 players who have gone through the youth system, we have an injured Walcott.
When will the FA learn that it is not about the best individuals, but getting a team understanding.
Why should players who want to play for England decide whether or not they turn out for under 17/20/21s
Have a listen to this. 10 mins long, but would love to see him top of the FA ladder.
talksport.com/football/other-countries-must-look-england-and-laugh-stuart-pearces-damning-verdict-after-uruguayWould Man Utd have had their recent golden years if the likes of Scholes, Giggs, Beckham, Nevilles met 4 times a year?
Englands form has been based on defensive/midfield partnerships that have been formed on club level.
Pearce talks a lot of sense, have a listen.
Comments
No disrespect, like.
How many Australian or Japanese football clubs can you name? How big a part of their culture is football?
That's the difference - football is our national sport, a sport ingrained in our culture and a sport we have a history in. Many people in this country identify themselves not by their profession and not by their social status, but by the very team they support of a weekend. Many offices all over the country will have exactly the same discussions on a Monday morning - discussions about the same teams, the same names and same games.
Consider one of your examples; Japan. Imagine if there was a sumo wrestling world cup and the Japanese went out in the first round, would they say "Oh well, the worlds a big place - we just aren't the best!"? No! Japan's Sumo Wrestling is our Football.
Football is a big deal over here.
What's more, we're home to one of the biggest leagues in the world. Many of the players we see dominating the world cup actually make their living in this country - because there is so much money in our football system, so much media coverage and so many resources dedicated to it. Is it wrong to assume that (homegrown) players being educated and brought into the game through such a system should be able to be competitive internationally? I don't think so.
We're nothing like Australia or Japan, and whilst we shouldn't delude ourselves any further that we're world beaters and going to take every tournament by storm, we should also be able to go in to a tournament expecting to get at least one point.
For what it's worth, I'm not one of those adults you mentioned - I sipped my beer throughout the game last night, admired a decent second half and had a post-match chat with a friend, disappointed but vaguely optimistic for the future.
We're meant to be the underdogs, the plucky English taking on the behemoths of Football in Germany, Spain and Brazil, but instead we kid ourselves that we are on the same level as them, merely because our domestic clubs play our 'national heroes' alongside real world class players
Despite the coach ratio thing, we have proper, organised football from 6 years old, solid aceademy development structure, huge resource and facilities, yet technically struggle against poor countries like Uraguay with a population of 3m
I just don't get it
But coaching has to be strong across the country - and the dinosaurs that want to win and want an edge by inhibiting kid's skills, want to use attributes of bigger kids, play on pitches that are too big - they need converting or be kicked out of the game. Serously, lots of grass roots coaches hate proportional picthes!!! When they play on a full sized pitch with 12-13 year olds they are happy! This is true because I have seen it!
Here's the article,
"Fabio Capello is not known for his lyrical and insightful use of English, but one of his observations about the national team struck a chord. “Lions in the autumn, lambs in the spring,” he said when asked to explain England’s recurrent failures.
Although Capello’s emphasis on the gruelling effects of a Premier League season has some merit, there has been a deeper malaise at work in Brazil, as England’s players have appeared to morph into even less intimidating farmyard animals. For crucial periods of both defeats by Italy and Uruguay, they resembled headless chickens, or rabbits caught in the headlights.
Steven Gerrard said as much on Thursday evening, conceding that England were naive and lacked the nous to respond to the changing game situation. Many of us are equally guilty of ignoring the mental side of the game, and the conversation soon moved on to more emotive topics, such as Gerrard’s feelings and international future.
While these were perfectly valid lines of inquiry, he confirmed the impression of a sporting culture in which the mind is regarded as secondary to the heart, and of course the feet. This old-school attitude remains depressingly widespread, with some even arguing that the presence of Steve Peters, the psychiatrist, at the World Cup is a sign of weakness.
Peters was brought in by Roy Hodgson to improve his players’ mental edge, but it was unrealistic to expect him to have a transformative effect in such a short period. What English players really need is a cultural revolution, in which the power of the brain is valued as much as the body.
Having spent years lamenting the technical deficit between English and foreign players, which has shown signs of closing recently, an even bigger mental gap may have been ignored. Even in their better moments, England appeared to be playing off the cuff. Why do English players seemingly lack such basic skills?
A big factor in this tournament is a lack of experience, for which Hodgson is culpable after assembling a squad in which only five players had played at a previous World Cup. He is also the victim of a systemic failure, however, as it is not just World Cup experience that his squad lacks. Very few of them have experience of any tournament football as a result of the disdain shown by Premier League clubs towards the international age-group competitions that take place every summer. This point has been laboured by the likes of Stuart Pearce, but remains pertinent.
As England Under-21 manager, Pearce was furious at being denied the services of 17 players at the European Championship last summer, and returned to the theme yesterday, arguing convincingly that Luke Shaw would have gained more from playing in the under-20 tournament in Toulon last month than warming the bench in Brazil. As a result of being denied such experiences, England’s players do not develop skills that are vital in tournament football — managing yourself through several games against very different opponents in a congested period, assessing evolving match situations and knowing when to accept a draw or push for a win — shortcomings that have all proved costly, as Gerrard acknowledged.
Though the pathway from age-group to senior international sides is clearly smoother elsewhere, even those who do make it to the top in this country are lacking in key areas. The tactical flexibility shown by many teams at this tournament, with many regularly switching formations during matches, is unheard of in England.
The gung-ho nature of the Premier League does not help in the development of players with more cerebral qualities, but there are other problems. It sometimes feels as if tactics are a dirty word in English football, with journalists often scorned by managers for asking about tactical issues. When a Premier League manager such as Tim Sherwood says he does not study formations and simply sends 11 players out on to the pitch, it is no wonder the English game is lacking.
This environment is not conducive to the production of thinking footballers, and it is instructive that even the most talented players who have emerged in recent years largely rely on physical virtues or their individuality. Such qualities are invaluable, of course, but it feels increasingly that England’s players and coaches should be sent back to school. And not to read Animal Farm."
If there was any thought that playing alongside Suarez, Kompany, Reza etc would improve English footballers then it has clearly failed.
Motivation specifically. In other countries representing your country is seen as a pinnacle and honour. In England it is a chore. Until that attitude changes and players have the genuine pride in the three lions of the distant past nothing will change.
Gerrard, for all his crocodile tears now because he doesn't want to be slaughtered in the press, is a good example of the modern English player more concerned about his pay packet rather than representing his country on the international stage.
Why is that? It has to be motivation. What else can it be?
Suarez took both goals superbly, but one was on a plate and the other from a defensive error.He hardly run us ragged for 90 minutes . He us a world class striker and they make a difference with the opportunities that come there way.
We simply don't have a world class player.
One who works as much with players' "heads" as with their ball skills.
Just ask Callum Harriott.
Maybe we as fans & media do need to adjust our attitude that we are simply not a top international side, just try to enjoy it.
Less pressure on the players that way too.
Not performing well at the World Cup and Euros is the SYMPTOM not the PROBLEM
One of the problems is that some of us still believe that somehow if we worked harder, cared more, sung the national anthem louder, etc etc that would make the players better players or the team better tactically. It wont.
So many non English players in the premiership is also a SYMPTOM not the PROBLEM.
Good English players can and do play at the top of the league. Banning all or limiting non-English players won't make average players better. There are plenty of non-nationals in the Spanish, Italian and German leagues.
We can compete at U17 level and that can't just be down to physical strength. Other teams are as big as us but we still win and get the finals of those tournaments.
Personally I think that we have an attitude in football and in work generally that learning beyond school age isn't something to be praised or encouraged too much. There are still regular derogatory remarks on here and elsewhere about coaches doing their badges for example. Somehow doing badges is not seen as a good thing by some but as a dilution of "raw" talent and creativity.
By 18 players are meant to be ready to go and the priority is Club football. Going to U21 tournaments is a waste of time and we (fans, clubs, players) don't take these tournaments seriously or see them as a necessary and very important step in a continuing learning process. Go back and look at the threads from the last U21 tournaments and see. Or listen to the Stuart Pearce piece at the top of the thread.
So we have players and even some coaches who don't value learning and tactics very highly or at least not as much as they do abroad. Maybe that goes back to the youth academies but the "get stuck in, stop fannying about, passing the ball and retaining possession is boring" mindset is still strong in our game.
So we have good players with technical skills but at crucial time in their development as people and players (18 to 23) we as a game stop seeing them as learners. We want them to be 100% ready by that age or else we bin them. Look at Sturridge's career path from City to Chelsea and Liverpool. Only now are we seeing him as top premiership player and England international. Before that he was regarded as a flop. And his age? 24.
. Yes we can coach better at all levels
. Yes we need more and better trained coaches
. Yes we have to stop the premier league club running youth football for themselves
. Yes we have to revamp EPPP so that small clubs get paid to run academies. The FA should be giving grants to the likes of Exeter or Crewe of £2m a year and saying "spend that on youth development only and if you produce a star then a big club has to pay you a decent fee" ie not the £400k that Charlton will get for Poyet if he does leave.
But we also have to stop
. Blaming it all on foreigners.
. Asking for more "passion"
. Blaming the manager. So many successful managers suddenly seem to turn into clueless clowns when managing England. Or is it that no matter how good they are they can't overcome the inherent problems in the England set up.
We have to start
. Getting young English players and coaches to leave England and learn more about football around the world.
. Value coaches and coaching for adults
. Take tournaments for U21s etc very seriously. If you are called up you go. No league games or pre-season friendlies instead.
. Realise it will take years, maybe decades, not weeks
The premier league takes all the cash and starves grass roots football.
The FA spend too much on big salaries and white elephant projects.
Sad but true.
For example, every single one of Holland's players in their squad have been at Ajax, PSV or Feyenoord before the age of 23.
To me it's all about the quality of player, and much as we like to blame the Premier League - with good reason - the simple truth is that any club would play English players if they were better than the foreign ones. Liverpool have a selection of the best English players, after all. They're not playing them for the good of the English game, they're playing them for the good of Liverpool.
I'm more and more persuaded that what's happened in Belgium is what's needed here. They recognised they were overemphasising systems over ability on the ball and started to address that at all levels. One simple thing they did was play 433 so that players were encouraged to run with the ball, take on opponents etc. Look at the players they're producing now.
Root and branch reform at the very youngest levels is needed. EPPP is a step, albeit imperfect whilst clubs want to stockpile players. St George's Park is another. More game time for English players will only be consistently achieved if English players are the best players - and isn't that how we want it?
A little anecdote from my past might help you.
Some years ago i took my son with his team when he was 11 to a tournament in France.
When we arrived at the tournament, we noticed the French kids were training ACROSS the pitch with 7 a-sides and small goals.
Some 2 weeks after returning, my sons coach came up to me with a petition asking me to sign - 'Whats this for?' I said ' Oh, its a directive from the London FA advising us that we have to play across the pitch and with small goals - well, we're not having that - we have always played on the big pitch with pwopa size goals - we intend to fight it' - i refused to sign it , he got very irate with me and started to deride me amongst his peers (he was a spanner btw).
Does this help you understand where the root of our problems lie?
Now, this was a few years ago and things may well have changed - but essentially what i am getting at is the general intellectual level of people at the roots of the game in comparison with other countries.
It was truly dreadful and made me despair about the coaching quality in this country.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27960739