Hodgson is the best English manager and I like him but look how Klinsman's got the Yanks playing. The "English Way" in terms of honest effort but also a team of 11 in their right positions and playing a passing game. A Crout manager for England anyone? I wouldn't object.
I think part of our problem is that we stuck with the 'Golden Generation' for too long. Lampard and Gerrard, Terry and Ferdinand, Ashley Cole - all great players and were worth their place in the side for a decade. Sadly we never managed to 'phase them out' so we have a team, now, with players chasing 30 with only a handful of caps. Jagielka is nowhere near good enough to play for England, he is 31, and is probably as good as we have. If he'd been in the set up for ten years he might be a lot better at these tournaments.
We need a complete rebuild with young players but as they haven't been near the side while those chasing 40 have been regulars we now have a very inexperienced squad. Roy Hodgson, apparently, asked Lampard to continue to make himself available for England during this 'transition' period. That transition should have started five years ago and finished two years ago.
Unless we are going to be sending Gerrard and Lampard out there with zimmer frames we have to 'let them go'. Sadly we are going to have to stomach a decade of under performance while we get a better balance of experience and youth with those too old moved on.
I think we can compete at these tournaments but we are, probably, not going to have the riches we had with Scholes, Gerrard, Beckham, Owen, Shearer, Terry, Ferdinand, Sol Campbell, Ashley Cole and Gary Nevile again for a few years. 1996, 1998, 2000 (which was a disaster) 2002, 2004 and to a smaller degree 2006 will probably be the best chance we had in our lifetimes to see England win something. I'm not sure we have anyone that would keep the players I've listed out of the side in the current set up.
I think part of our problem is that we stuck with the 'Golden Generation' for too long. Lampard and Gerrard, Terry and Ferdinand, Ashley Cole - all great players and were worth their place in the side for a decade. Sadly we never managed to 'phase them out' so we have a team, now, with players chasing 30 with only a handful of caps. Jagielka is nowhere near good enough to play for England, he is 31, and is probably as good as we have. If he'd been in the set up for ten years he might be a lot better at these tournaments.
We need a complete rebuild with young players but as they haven't been near the side while those chasing 40 have been regulars we now have a very inexperienced squad. Roy Hodgson, apparently, asked Lampard to continue to make himself available for England during this 'transition' period. That transition should have started five years ago and finished two years ago.
Unless we are going to be sending Gerrard and Lampard out there with zimmer frames we have to 'let them go'. Sadly we are going to have to stomach a decade of under performance while we get a better balance of experience and youth with those too old moved on.
I think we can compete at these tournaments but we are, probably, not going to have the riches we had with Scholes, Gerrard, Beckham, Owen, Shearer, Terry, Ferdinand, Sol Campbell, Ashley Cole and Gary Nevile again for a few years. 1996, 1998, 2000 (which was a disaster) 2002, 2004 and to a smaller degree 2006 will probably be the best chance we had in our lifetimes to see England win something. I'm not sure we have anyone that would keep the players I've listed out of the side in the current set up.
Could not agree more, we kept on some of these players long after we should and Hodgson is also guilty of that, although he has blooded way more youngsters than his predecessors.
The main stumbling block now to England developing into a decent side is the Granny Shagger himself - he has no place in a young team that needs to be built on pace and purpose.
The one thing we have as a football nation right now is pace in attack with the likes of Sterling and Barkley but you nullify that when you have that tub of lard Rooney because, quite frankly, the bloke could not outpace Christian Dailly and if he is the main striker then he is simply not going to be able to get in behind.
Rooney is simply not the same player he was 10 years ago when he broke through, at that stage he really was a ball of energy that created things but now he looks like he is playing with a piano on his back.
The team needs to be re-built with the younger players to the fore and if Hodgson keeps Gerrard and Rooney involved then he is a bloody idiot, they have had their chances and never taken them.
Were crap with a crap manager. It's nearly 50 years since we lucked in on home soil. And we have achieved nothing since. Players to old, players to young, players not good enough etc. The perpetual failure will continue till we produce players with a backbone, willing to die for the cause. It's always someone else's fault. Hodgson should at the very least of offered his resignation.
I havent seen one team in the R16 that we would have beaten. In fact, I suspect going out early saved us a pasting later on. We added nothing to this world cup, and if I were not English, then as a neutral England is the team I would probably be least interested in watching.
To be honest as a neutral England had been the team that I most looked forward to until I watched the Honduras friendly. Well, maybe I'm not a 100% neutral. I actually hoped England would do well in this tournament. The first performance against Italy was fairly good despite the disappointing result and I expected England to go through the group stage. Since then I haven't watched many other games in full because of the time difference but have been following the tournament by watching extended highlights every day. I know my opinion doesn't count but I think that your group was indeed difficult. Had you been in say Greece's group you surely would have had a much bigger chance of going through and wouldn't have ended with just one point. But then again, when I look at the other teams' performances in the 1/8 finals, I come to the conclusion that your group was not overly more difficult than the other ones. Teams from America and Africa have been brilliant and many of them are better than England.
In a word, I thought England would do well with so many promising young talents coming through but the hard reality is that they're not as great as we thought, yet. And the senior players have let the fans down, too. Now I'm not so sure whether England will turn out to be a much improved team in 2016 but nevertheless I sincerely wish you the best of luck.
The biggest difference to me is how some of these sides look much fitter than we did - at Wembley for example we'd probably beat most of these sides that have surprised everyone...but not so sure in such conditions.
Its more than passion and desire we need to improve...
I havent seen one team in the R16 that we would have beaten. In fact, I suspect going out early saved us a pasting later on. We added nothing to this world cup, and if I were not English, then as a neutral England is the team I would probably be least interested in watching.
To be honest as a neutral England had been the team that I most looked forward to until I watched the Honduras friendly. Well, maybe I'm not a 100% neutral. I actually hoped England would do well in this tournament. The first performance against Italy was fairly good despite the disappointing result and I expected England to go through the group stage. Since then I haven't watched many other games in full because of the time difference but have been following the tournament by watching extended highlights every day. I know my opinion doesn't count but I think that your group was indeed difficult. Had you been in say Greece's group you surely would have had a much bigger chance of going through and wouldn't have ended with just one point. But then again, when I look at the other teams' performances in the 1/8 finals, I come to the conclusion that your group was not overly more difficult than the other ones. Teams from America and Africa have been brilliant and many of them are better than England.
In a word, I thought England would do well with so many promising young talents coming through but the hard reality is that they're not as great as we thought, yet. And the senior players have let the fans down, too. Now I'm not so sure whether England will turn out to be a much improved team in 2016 but nevertheless I sincerely wish you the best of luck.
I've made this point elsewhere, but I think if England are going to progress Roy needs to cast his net wider. If there are no world class players ready for England, (and I don't think there currently are) then go for those who are prepared to put themselves forward with a bit of commitment. If all we're expecting is Round of 16 or quarters, then, frankly, that approach has worked wonders for Costa Rica and the US, and nearly did for Australia (who really did have a difficult group). Personally, I'm happy so long as England try to play well and still lose to a better team. The fact that in all the criticism of England's performance, no one is massively surprised or has any convincing suggestions of players who didn't go who would have made a big difference, makes me think it is probably about our level and collectively we are being more realistic about it. It's a place to start to build from, but it will take quite a few years.
If we'd have played like USA last night and lost all 3 I wouldn't have minded. Its the style and effort that irked me. Not sure that's the manager, more the players to be honest.
People have been banging on about Algeria suddenly being this great emerging team - have they looked at their actual results?
Lost to the Belgians, drew with the dire Russians and got through thanks to a spanking of the dire South Koreans - they then met Germany and could and should have lost comfortably in 90 mins.
You could say exactly the same about Nigeria who progressed thanks to a 1-0 win against the mighty Bosnia and then got dealt with by the French.
I make no excuses for the state of English football at all but the group was clearly a very difficult one - probably only Groups B and G were as hard.
Keep banging that drum about "clearly a very difficult group"...
The two difficult teams have been knocked out by Colombia and Costa Rica. I suppose you reckon they will play each other in the final.
The other team took penalties to get past Greece.
'dire Russians', 'mighty Bosnia'... time to accept England failed to get through a group that looked tougher on paper than it actually was.
This is the first time in World Cup history that three former winners have been drawn in the same group.
Italy - Euro 2012 finalists Uruguay - 2010 World Cup Semi Finalists with one of the top 3 strikers in the world.
So yes, it was a difficult group. Costa Rica are the underdogs of the tournament - there is always one nation that really surprises, and they happened to be in England's group.
Not justifying England's failure in any way, but it was a tough group. The facts speak for themselves.
The fact that we couldn't even beat Honduras who are absolute dog turd let alone them having 10 men in a friendly just before the world cup says all you need to know. England would of struggled to fight their way out of a wet paper bag this world cup, it wouldn't of mattered who was in our group as we still would of failed miserably like we always do. No doubt when the euros start coming around we will once again be world beaters.
I thought England were the better team in many aspects of all of their games - not by much and not where it mattered though. The defence was awful though and we missed too many chances. Lineker alluded to one of the issues when he said that this team had no in game intelligence - numerous examples of this - but it is basically about the ability to learn as you play and change what you do. Examples of this was despite clear clues what the most productive option was offensively in games, they didn't take them - defensively - the ability to realise that Uruguay were not attacking in numbers so for a premiership defender to look where he was and what he was doing. In all honesty, Jagielka earned his place but that would be it as far as I am concerned - he has shown he is a liability at this level and we need to search for the alternatives.
And as for Hodgson. I am upset because I thought he was a sly old fox not a doddery past it old fool - which unfortunately he came accross as. Lost all respect for him for not resigning or at least offering to work on for a quarter of the pay with a big bonus if he actually achieves something, which everybody bar the idiot who thinks Prince Harry attending would have made a difference, can see won't happen.
England played alright, they had a difficult but not impossible group. Rooney set up and scored our only two goals. I would have taken Crouch, other than that the squad was probably about as good as we have.
There's no reason why ten decent young players cannot come through in the next two years, but if half the country insists we MUST have an English manager, then it will continue to hold us back until someone exciting emerges.
If we'd have played like USA last night and lost all 3 I wouldn't have minded. Its the style and effort that irked me. Not sure that's the manager, more the players to be honest.
If we'd have played like USA last night and lost all 3 I wouldn't have minded. Its the style and effort that irked me. Not sure that's the manager, more the players to be honest.
Pretty much what I think, but do think you need an inspirational manager to push them as well and I'm not sure that's Roy.
I like Roy Hodgson...but, he doesnt have it in his locker to make england a SUCCESSFUL international side. Then again, same thing can be said about our previous load of managers. I fear, judging from that uraguay game, hodgson is tactically inept at world cup level and is too nice of a person. Being nice is not a crime as a football manager, but sometimes it just doesnt work.
England played alright, they had a difficult but not impossible group. Rooney set up and scored our only two goals. I would have taken Crouch, other than that the squad was probably about as good as we have.
There's no reason why ten decent young players cannot come through in the next two years, but if half the country insists we MUST have an English manager, then it will continue to hold us back until someone exciting emerges.
England need to find a balance - they were too positive and if they are going to achieve anything in the next few years they have to respect betetr players by marking them - If I was England manager, I would be looking for a couple of spoilers we can deploy.
They are very comfortable with their system - a few years back they changed the grass roots structure and also made all teams play 4-3-3. The sort of changes they made were the ones the Premier league would not allow us to make. But they are reaping the benefits.
The first thing that needs to be put to bed is this myth of the 'Miracle Manager' with people talking about bringing in Redknapp (PMSL), Klinsmann or some other.
The Belgians did not improve to this point by putting their chips on some wonder-coach - they changed their entire system to produce better players.
Hodgson has done a good job in getting England to a stage where we no longer (as we were in 2010) look a complete embarrassment to the country, we are starting to play some really good stuff.
Look at the goal against Uruguay, that came from a lovely piece of possession play with Sturridge linking with Johnson and Rooney getting the goal - we produced nothing like that a couple of years back.
Let's leave Hodgson there for the next Euros and see how he gets on - there is nothing to be gained by bringing in a new coach.
Although that table at the beginning of the thread had no scientific value, we were in fact officially the 26th ranked team out of 32 (according to the Metro (reliable source) today), so I guess whoever compiles these facts was working off something similar.
Roll on Norway at home for the friendly on 3rd September. The good news is that over the last day or so, Jack Wilshere (one of our overrated mediocre talents) has been caught smoking again, and Joey Barton has volunteered to come out of retirement.
International competitions give players a chance to put themselves in the shop window. They all want to play in the English Premier League. Unfortunately for us, the England squad is full of players already there. Could this explain the lack of motivation in our players?
If so, any England manager is on a hiding to nothing.
Comments
The "English Way" in terms of honest effort but also a team of 11 in their right positions and playing a passing game.
A Crout manager for England anyone? I wouldn't object.
We need a complete rebuild with young players but as they haven't been near the side while those chasing 40 have been regulars we now have a very inexperienced squad. Roy Hodgson, apparently, asked Lampard to continue to make himself available for England during this 'transition' period. That transition should have started five years ago and finished two years ago.
Unless we are going to be sending Gerrard and Lampard out there with zimmer frames we have to 'let them go'. Sadly we are going to have to stomach a decade of under performance while we get a better balance of experience and youth with those too old moved on.
I think we can compete at these tournaments but we are, probably, not going to have the riches we had with Scholes, Gerrard, Beckham, Owen, Shearer, Terry, Ferdinand, Sol Campbell, Ashley Cole and Gary Nevile again for a few years. 1996, 1998, 2000 (which was a disaster) 2002, 2004 and to a smaller degree 2006 will probably be the best chance we had in our lifetimes to see England win something. I'm not sure we have anyone that would keep the players I've listed out of the side in the current set up.
The main stumbling block now to England developing into a decent side is the Granny Shagger himself - he has no place in a young team that needs to be built on pace and purpose.
The one thing we have as a football nation right now is pace in attack with the likes of Sterling and Barkley but you nullify that when you have that tub of lard Rooney because, quite frankly, the bloke could not outpace Christian Dailly and if he is the main striker then he is simply not going to be able to get in behind.
Rooney is simply not the same player he was 10 years ago when he broke through, at that stage he really was a ball of energy that created things but now he looks like he is playing with a piano on his back.
The team needs to be re-built with the younger players to the fore and if Hodgson keeps Gerrard and Rooney involved then he is a bloody idiot, they have had their chances and never taken them.
Were crap with a crap manager.
It's nearly 50 years since we lucked in on home soil. And we have achieved nothing since.
Players to old, players to young, players not good enough etc.
The perpetual failure will continue till we produce players with a backbone, willing to die for the cause.
It's always someone else's fault.
Hodgson should at the very least of offered his resignation.
In a word, I thought England would do well with so many promising young talents coming through but the hard reality is that they're not as great as we thought, yet. And the senior players have let the fans down, too. Now I'm not so sure whether England will turn out to be a much improved team in 2016 but nevertheless I sincerely wish you the best of luck.
Its more than passion and desire we need to improve...
Your opinion is valid dont worry about that.
Personally, I'm happy so long as England try to play well and still lose to a better team. The fact that in all the criticism of England's performance, no one is massively surprised or has any convincing suggestions of players who didn't go who would have made a big difference, makes me think it is probably about our level and collectively we are being more realistic about it. It's a place to start to build from, but it will take quite a few years.
Italy - Euro 2012 finalists
Uruguay - 2010 World Cup Semi Finalists with one of the top 3 strikers in the world.
So yes, it was a difficult group. Costa Rica are the underdogs of the tournament - there is always one nation that really surprises, and they happened to be in England's group.
Not justifying England's failure in any way, but it was a tough group. The facts speak for themselves.
And as for Hodgson. I am upset because I thought he was a sly old fox not a doddery past it old fool - which unfortunately he came accross as. Lost all respect for him for not resigning or at least offering to work on for a quarter of the pay with a big bonus if he actually achieves something, which everybody bar the idiot who thinks Prince Harry attending would have made a difference, can see won't happen.
There's no reason why ten decent young players cannot come through in the next two years, but if half the country insists we MUST have an English manager, then it will continue to hold us back until someone exciting emerges.
The Belgians did not improve to this point by putting their chips on some wonder-coach - they changed their entire system to produce better players.
Hodgson has done a good job in getting England to a stage where we no longer (as we were in 2010) look a complete embarrassment to the country, we are starting to play some really good stuff.
Look at the goal against Uruguay, that came from a lovely piece of possession play with Sturridge linking with Johnson and Rooney getting the goal - we produced nothing like that a couple of years back.
Let's leave Hodgson there for the next Euros and see how he gets on - there is nothing to be gained by bringing in a new coach.
Roll on Norway at home for the friendly on 3rd September. The good news is that over the last day or so, Jack Wilshere (one of our overrated mediocre talents) has been caught smoking again, and Joey Barton has volunteered to come out of retirement.
The future's bright
If so, any England manager is on a hiding to nothing.