I will turn the question back on the last two posters.
How do you account for the England team's performance since 1996? Are you happy with it? If not, what accounts for it? And what should be done about it?
Am not happy with it but then I look at the Iceland National Team or British Cycling as inspiration.
Between 1996 and the 2010 World Cup there seemed to be an emphasis on Football in England which was to change the style of play and how kids played the game based on whoever won the last Major Tournament... When Brazil managed it everyone we should play like them, when Spain did it, everyone once again said we should change our approach.
For me we've almost got to forget trying to win a competition and concentrate on working on building an established team.
I used the Icelandic National Team and British Cycling as I see them as perfect examples both have been built from the foundations and are beginning to see the fruits of their labour; Iceland having built the indoor facilities have now qualified for a Major Tournament and who knows where that'll end...
British Cycling on the other hand have seen the fruits of their labours here and now... Chris Hoy / Mark Cavendish / Bradley Wiggins and Chris Froome are the main names to have turned Britain into one of the most dangerous countries in the Sport.
For both these, the size of the country hasn't mattered, instead both have simply installed new ideas sprinkled with a bit of patience.
We can smash Hungary/Iceland/Austria all we want in ro16. It's France in the quarters and I do not fancy us.
How good does the other half of the draw look now with Spain going into our one? Criminal that we aren't in it. We would have a clear route to the final!
Hope Roy proves me wrong and we somehow turn over France, can't see it though.
Big, big opportunity missed yesterday, which has become even more apparent due to that Croatia win.
This is England we are talking about, we are not going to "smash" any team, especially in the knock out stages.
It won't ever change for a number of reasons I won't bore you all to death with an in depth assessment but some key reasons are these
1) not enough focus on technique at development level STILL
2) disproportionate revenue distribution. Chelsea and their horrible youth farming policy where they sign up anyone half decent only for then never to get near the first team because they've signed a Dutch 23 year old instead for 35 million
3) the premier league. Ticket prices too high, enormous pressure so nobody gives young players a go
4) English players themselves not moving abroad to test themselves or even just to play in a top tier. Too content to draw a wage and constantly schlepping about on loan until they are 24 and get released
5) the FA, they tie managers up and hang them out to dry. They do not support them when big decisions are needed
6) a lack of desire from English coaches to go abroad and learn. No nation has a monopoly on how best to do things but if you are only used to the English way we will always be at a disadvantage.
7) stereotypically, too many foreign players. No incentive whatsoever for premier league clubs to help the national team purely token gestures.
8) the British press. For some reason they are intent on making life as difficult as possible for everyone involved in the national team and always have been.
Especially now, we're through to the Last 16 yet the Media well and truly have their knives out; Shearer is banging on about Hodgson not knowing his squad... Martin Samuel is saying we've got the Football version of Stuart Lancaster when we need an Eddie Jones
What are they all going to do if we somehow win the competition?
Just chuck those articles in the bin and wheel out the patriotic ones that say they were always behind the team
It won't ever change for a number of reasons I won't bore you all to death with an in depth assessment but some key reasons are these
1) not enough focus on technique at development level STILL
2) disproportionate revenue distribution. Chelsea and their horrible youth farming policy where they sign up anyone half decent only for then never to get near the first team because they've signed a Dutch 23 year old instead for 35 million
3) the premier league. Ticket prices too high, enormous pressure so nobody gives young players a go
4) English players themselves not moving abroad to test themselves or even just to play in a top tier. Too content to draw a wage and constantly schlepping about on loan until they are 24 and get released
5) the FA, they tie managers up and hang them out to dry. They do not support them when big decisions are needed
6) a lack of desire from English coaches to go abroad and learn. No nation has a monopoly on how best to do things but if you are only used to the English way we will always be at a disadvantage.
7) stereotypically, too many foreign players. No incentive whatsoever for premier league clubs to help the national team purely token gestures.
8) the British press. For some reason they are intent on making life as difficult as possible for everyone involved in the national team and always have been.
9) Cant take penalties. Theres a fine line between success and failure at International tournaments.
Interestingly there was a short video prior to one of the BBC games about how to try and win the Tournament.
Germany prior to the 2014 World Cup went out to view their base and their team psychiatrist said that the area wasnt small enough and to break up the hostile atmosphere between Bayern and Dortmund, Low simply mixed them together forcing them to get along.
Even the prick Rio Ferdinand said in the same video that he'd get together with England and all the players from the big clubs were more interested in trying to ensure that a player from a rival club didnt get one over them for the Premier League title.
Really think that we should try to take that same German approach in how the players get together.
Its stupid because from what I read it sounds like Hodgson has been doing a good job of installing that attitude, but will no doubt be gone after these Euros because the armchair fans / the pundits and the media wont think he's good enough
The reality is that there was nothing more England could have done against the Slovaks, they tried every possible means of scoring but could not break them down - it happens to the best sides, even the world champion Germans could not break down the pretty ordinary Poles.
England played as well as they could have done, they controlled the entire game and passed the ball around but they just did not get that break of the ball which Wales got against the same opponents.
There were occasions last night when a Slovak midfielder would win the ball, cross the halfway line and then having passed the ball on immediately retreated back into his own half! On the very rare occasions they entered our half they would push no more than four players forward and you'd struggle to find a single moment when they had more than one player in our box.
Compare last night against the utter farce which Capello oversaw when we drew 0-0 with the might of Algeria in SA 2010 World Cup and barely created a chance and had no tactics apart from belting long balls at our front players, the USA and Slovenia games were not much better.
We won't be that unlucky again and, as others have said, when better teams come out against us we will be better suited to playing them on the break and with some space in behind which we can exploit.
I have seen nothing to be scared of from any other team so far, the only team that worries me are Italy because they just don't look like ever conceding a bloody goal.
I can't agree with this. I thought first half we played really well, looked a constant threat and done all but score. That level in my opinion was not maintained or increased in the 2nd half. It became very pedestrian, slow and predictable.
Players were constantly turning back into each other, passes were sloppy at times and over hit often, there was a lack of decisive movement and we did not get down the flanks and stretch them at pace nearly enough.
First half great but we didn't have enough about us, or a plan B to go to in the 2nd half and it showed. For a team with 10 behind the ball, Wayne Rooney coming on is not going to force them to change what they had been doing - it changed nothing and was just a different player doing the exact same things.
I'm not saying that's the wrong approach but for me part of the problem is we have always been trying to copy other country's styles. And always far far too late. There's no problem with taking ideas and adapting them but we really need to come up with our own style, philosophies and rules. Otherwise we just end up with a mish mash of everything as is evidenced by the current squad.
Hodgson thou earning less than Capello, is probably the highest paid Manager at Euro 2016. He has to get the big decisions right. Not to attack a poor Russian side or play a high line in the last 15 minutes was a shocker. Only a fully match fit Jack Wiltshere could have unlocked that Slovakian defense. In the first half he proved Why Leeds have had 6 managers since he last played 90 minutes ! Drinkwater should have been in the squad for either Henderson/Wiltshere (fitness issues) plus Townsend for that Man city reserve player Sterling who is a shadow of the Liverpool player of 18 months ago. I like others said that at the Time, Roy who earns the big bucks thought he knew better.
The group stage is all about getting through it, which is something we have struggled to do at tournaments in the past. So job done.
To be honest, I didn't realise that so many people - at least judging from this thread - had such high expectations from us in the first place.
Did people expect us to be winning all our games by two or three goals or something? If so, why?
Before it started I thought we'd win one and draw two of our group games, I just got the order wrong.
No high expectations from me. I'Ve always predicted when asked that we will get out of this group and no further. I think the constant turnover of England coaches at the behest of the media is ridiculous, it has not changed anything since 1996, and never will on its own.
Of course I get that it is difficult to "play" against a team that set up like Slovakia. And the Czechs are pretty damn critical of their own team. They know what happens if you just set up to defend deep against a team of good footballers such as Spain. You lose. What they were laughing at, and what was embarrassing, was our apparent inability to maintain the most elementary football skills. Like trapping the sodding thing.
Maybe it was the beer. Staropramen unfiltered. Feeling well rough today.
Wonder if they're still laughing this morning having watched their own team finish bottom of the group without winning a game!
Sure, but the answer of my Czech friends (that group in the pub were just random strangers) is that their national team is never bigged up that much in the first place. Their highly successful 96 and 04 teams (both of whom got further than England) are considered to be legendary, while this team was considered to have done a good job just to get to the Euros - the Dutch were in their group don't forget. With a country of this size, it is more difficult to guarantee a supply line of world class talent in each generation. The 96 team had the emerging talents of Nedved, Berger and Poborsky, and of course the peerless Nedved went on to lead the 04 team, and had he not got injured in the first half against Greece, might have led them to the title. That team had Baros and Rosicky as well as Koller and Jankulovski. And of course a young Petr Cech
This team has no one fit to tie Nedved's bootlaces but everyone knows that. Two of their starters (Pudil and Skalak) play in the Championship.
I just feel that with six times the population, and all that money in English football, we should ask ourselves how it is possible that over the last 20 years, the Czechs (and other modest countries) have outperformed England in terms of Euro and World Cup results. Maybe that is roughly what was in the mind of those guys in the pub.
I agree the England team is often overhyped by the press, but that's neither the team's fault nor the people of the country. I think from this thread alone you can see there's a great degree of pessimism among a sizeable proportion of England fans.
The population line is one I've never really understood. Uruguay have a population of just over three million. A third of London. Very good team (historically and generally).
India and China - over two and a half billion people between them. Very poor teams. Larger populations don't necessary translate into having better teams or players. It goes much deeper than that. If football was that simple, no-one would ever watch it.
So I still find a Czech Republic fan laughing at England bizarre. To use a playground analogy, it's like a kid who got a D in GCSE maths taking the mickey out of his mate who "only" got a B. Odd.
Hodgson thou earning less than Capello, is probably the highest paid Manager at Euro 2016. He has to get the big decisions right.
He is the highest paid manager but that is pretty much irrelevant. We have the richest FA and to be able to attract anyone into the job you have to pay big wages. At the very minimum equal to what a PL manager would get.
Hodgson thou earning less than Capello, is probably the highest paid Manager at Euro 2016. He has to get the big decisions right. Not to attack a poor Russian side or play a high line in the last 15 minutes was a shocker. Only a fully match fit Jack Wiltshere could have unlocked that Slovakian defense. In the first half he proved Why Leeds have had 6 managers since he last played 90 minutes ! Drinkwater should have been in the squad for either Henderson/Wiltshere (fitness issues) plus Townsend for that Man city reserve player Sterling who is a shadow of the Liverpool player of 18 months ago. I like others said that at the Time, Roy who earns the big bucks thought he knew better.
The problem in the second half against Slovakia, is that we weren't creative enough, and the likes of Kane aren't going to create chances against a deep defence. I would have left Lallana on or even brought Barkeley on, as with his running and dribbling ability, he might have created something out of nothing.
It's notable that Dier really looks the part, disciplined defensively but also capable of getting forward effectively. Perhaps we should send all out young players to Portugal for their development!
Because the size of a population means diddly squat when it comes to Sport.
Why are Great Britain usually fourth in the Olympics or why are we constantly rivaling Australia in Rugby and Cricket.
Has anyone here read the book 'Soccernomics'? If I remember correctly - population size, interest in the sport and income/wealth were settled on as the main contributors to success in national football.
The stats in the book are far from perfect, and got quite widely panned by statisticians because it was overly simplistic - but either way, I thought it was really interesting - and one of their main points was that that population size is a big factor.
In the end it claims that for these reasons the United States, Japan, China and Turkey would likely challenge the European football establishment in the future. I think it was a year or two after it was published that the States went on to finish ahead of us in the World Cup group stages.
Hodgson thou earning less than Capello, is probably the highest paid Manager at Euro 2016. He has to get the big decisions right.
He is the highest paid manager but that is pretty much irrelevant. We have the richest FA and to be able to attract anyone into the job you have to pay big wages. At the very minimum equal to what a PL manager would get.
If any of the English managers of the last ten years in the premiership had been offered the job before Capello, they would have taken it for half of what he was paid. The money is only relevant in that if your paying top dollar then you at least want someone who is sharp as a knife and quick thinking. Taking 135 minutes to get Vardy and Sturidge involved doesn't strike me as the right guy in charge.
Hodgson thou earning less than Capello, is probably the highest paid Manager at Euro 2016. He has to get the big decisions right.
He is the highest paid manager but that is pretty much irrelevant. We have the richest FA and to be able to attract anyone into the job you have to pay big wages. At the very minimum equal to what a PL manager would get.
If any of the English managers of the last ten years in the premiership had been offered the job before Capello, they would have taken it for half of what he was paid. The money is only relevant in that if your paying top dollar then you at least want someone who is sharp as a knife and quick thinking. Taking 135 minutes to get Vardy and Sturidge involved doesn't strike me as the right guy in charge.
Oh come on don't start with this patriotic nonsense. The English managers knocking about before Capello would have pretty much all be taking a step up in what they had available at the time so of course they would have taken it. At the same time the FA are always going to be forced to pay top dollar for whatever manager they get in. We have the richest league in the world, the richest FA, the highest paid managers and players plus you also have to deal with the nonsense that is our press and fans. Fucking right they should be paying top money for a manager. Wouldn't you be asking for it as well?
Hodgson thou earning less than Capello, is probably the highest paid Manager at Euro 2016. He has to get the big decisions right. Not to attack a poor Russian side or play a high line in the last 15 minutes was a shocker. Only a fully match fit Jack Wiltshere could have unlocked that Slovakian defense. In the first half he proved Why Leeds have had 6 managers since he last played 90 minutes ! Drinkwater should have been in the squad for either Henderson/Wiltshere (fitness issues) plus Townsend for that Man city reserve player Sterling who is a shadow of the Liverpool player of 18 months ago. I like others said that at the Time, Roy who earns the big bucks thought he knew better.
The problem in the second half against Slovakia, is that we weren't creative enough, and the likes of Kane aren't going to create chances against a deep defence. I would have left Lallana on or even brought Barkeley on, as with his running and dribbling ability, he might have created something out of nothing.
It's notable that Dier really looks the part, disciplined defensively but also capable of getting forward effectively. Perhaps we should send all out young players to Portugal for their development!
Yeah, I thought any one of Rashford, Barkley or even Sterling would have been a reasonable sub - someone who could run at the defence and try and beat a couple of men to open some space.
I think the only really criticism I have of England so far is that there has been a bit of a lack of cutting edge, but apart from that we have looked as good as we have done at a major tournament for, knocking on, 20 years. For all the fact that the results have been a little uninspiring I think this has a very different feel to recent failures at tournaments.
I actually think that England's touch,close control and passing in tight spaces has been as good as I can remember. We're far from the most technically gifted team at the finals but we're better than average for an England team. Even Spain have struggled to break down massed ranks defence and that is all that England have faced so far.
The fact is it is very hard to score goals against teams that only want to defend.
Haven't the Czech Republic qualified for just 1 of the last 5 World Cups?
Yes that's right, 2006, so I was partly wrong; England have out performed them in World Cup terms since 1996, but not in Euro terms. Of course I am not at all holding up Czech football as an example, it has issues of corruption and suffers from often being in ice hockey's shadow, but Czechs (and I think many other smaller countries' fans) think we exude a Big Club fan mentality, and wonder why, given our results.
It won't ever change for a number of reasons I won't bore you all to death with an in depth assessment but some key reasons are these
1) not enough focus on technique at development level STILL
2) disproportionate revenue distribution. Chelsea and their horrible youth farming policy where they sign up anyone half decent only for then never to get near the first team because they've signed a Dutch 23 year old instead for 35 million
3) the premier league. Ticket prices too high, enormous pressure so nobody gives young players a go
4) English players themselves not moving abroad to test themselves or even just to play in a top tier. Too content to draw a wage and constantly schlepping about on loan until they are 24 and get released
5) the FA, they tie managers up and hang them out to dry. They do not support them when big decisions are needed
6) a lack of desire from English coaches to go abroad and learn. No nation has a monopoly on how best to do things but if you are only used to the English way we will always be at a disadvantage.
7) stereotypically, too many foreign players. No incentive whatsoever for premier league clubs to help the national team purely token gestures.
8) the British press. For some reason they are intent on making life as difficult as possible for everyone involved in the national team and always have been.
great post. I agree with all of those points. I would add just one. The fact that the FAPL is a separate organisation. This means that English football cannot effectively channel its financial resources or prioritise it's league organisation in a way which nurtures a strong national team. Unlike in Germany.
It won't ever change for a number of reasons I won't bore you all to death with an in depth assessment but some key reasons are these
1) not enough focus on technique at development level STILL
2) disproportionate revenue distribution. Chelsea and their horrible youth farming policy where they sign up anyone half decent only for then never to get near the first team because they've signed a Dutch 23 year old instead for 35 million
3) the premier league. Ticket prices too high, enormous pressure so nobody gives young players a go
4) English players themselves not moving abroad to test themselves or even just to play in a top tier. Too content to draw a wage and constantly schlepping about on loan until they are 24 and get released
5) the FA, they tie managers up and hang them out to dry. They do not support them when big decisions are needed
6) a lack of desire from English coaches to go abroad and learn. No nation has a monopoly on how best to do things but if you are only used to the English way we will always be at a disadvantage.
7) stereotypically, too many foreign players. No incentive whatsoever for premier league clubs to help the national team purely token gestures.
8) the British press. For some reason they are intent on making life as difficult as possible for everyone involved in the national team and always have been.
Hodgson thou earning less than Capello, is probably the highest paid Manager at Euro 2016. He has to get the big decisions right. Not to attack a poor Russian side or play a high line in the last 15 minutes was a shocker. Only a fully match fit Jack Wiltshere could have unlocked that Slovakian defense. In the first half he proved Why Leeds have had 6 managers since he last played 90 minutes ! Drinkwater should have been in the squad for either Henderson/Wiltshere (fitness issues) plus Townsend for that Man city reserve player Sterling who is a shadow of the Liverpool player of 18 months ago. I like others said that at the Time, Roy who earns the big bucks thought he knew better.
The problem in the second half against Slovakia, is that we weren't creative enough, and the likes of Kane aren't going to create chances against a deep defence. I would have left Lallana on or even brought Barkeley on, as with his running and dribbling ability, he might have created something out of nothing.
It's notable that Dier really looks the part, disciplined defensively but also capable of getting forward effectively. Perhaps we should send all out young players to Portugal for their development!
Yeah, I thought any one of Rashford, Barkley or even Sterling would have been a reasonable sub - someone who could run at the defence and try and beat a couple of men to open some space.
I think the only really criticism I have of England so far is that there has been a bit of a lack of cutting edge, but apart from that we have looked as good as we have done at a major tournament for, knocking on, 20 years. For all the fact that the results have been a little uninspiring I think this has a very different feel to recent failures at tournaments.
I actually think that England's touch,close control and passing in tight spaces has been as good as I can remember. We're far from the most technically gifted team at the finals but we're better than average for an England team. Even Spain have struggled to break down massed ranks defence and that is all that England have faced so far.
The fact is it is very hard to score goals against teams that only want to defend.
Hodgson thou earning less than Capello, is probably the highest paid Manager at Euro 2016. He has to get the big decisions right.
He is the highest paid manager but that is pretty much irrelevant. We have the richest FA and to be able to attract anyone into the job you have to pay big wages. At the very minimum equal to what a PL manager would get.
If any of the English managers of the last ten years in the premiership had been offered the job before Capello, they would have taken it for half of what he was paid. The money is only relevant in that if your paying top dollar then you at least want someone who is sharp as a knife and quick thinking. Taking 135 minutes to get Vardy and Sturidge involved doesn't strike me as the right guy in charge.
Oh come on don't start with this patriotic nonsense. The English managers knocking about before Capello would have pretty much all be taking a step up in what they had available at the time so of course they would have taken it. At the same time the FA are always going to be forced to pay top dollar for whatever manager they get in. We have the richest league in the world, the richest FA, the highest paid managers and players plus you also have to deal with the nonsense that is our press and fans. Fucking right they should be paying top money for a manager. Wouldn't you be asking for it as well?
You are missing my point, i don't care where the manager or head coach comes from as long as they can make good decisions. Eddie Jones from Australia made a fantastic call when he took Burrell off and put Ford on in the 1st Rugby test against Australia. Cappello was a poor international manager, treating the players like children and yet earned a fortune at Russia as well where he was rubbish. Erickson who had a top squad wasn't capable of doing any coaching his self,
I would like to see 2 million a year given for a manager of England with a bonus of 2 million if we get to a final and another 2 million if we win it.
They wouldn't be paying out anytime soon with some of the decisions that are made in the tournament since 1990 in WC and 1996 in Euros.
Winning all the games in easy qualifying really means nothing when in the heat of competitions.
It won't ever change for a number of reasons I won't bore you all to death with an in depth assessment but some key reasons are these
1) not enough focus on technique at development level STILL
2) disproportionate revenue distribution. Chelsea and their horrible youth farming policy where they sign up anyone half decent only for then never to get near the first team because they've signed a Dutch 23 year old instead for 35 million
3) the premier league. Ticket prices too high, enormous pressure so nobody gives young players a go
4) English players themselves not moving abroad to test themselves or even just to play in a top tier. Too content to draw a wage and constantly schlepping about on loan until they are 24 and get released
5) the FA, they tie managers up and hang them out to dry. They do not support them when big decisions are needed
6) a lack of desire from English coaches to go abroad and learn. No nation has a monopoly on how best to do things but if you are only used to the English way we will always be at a disadvantage.
7) stereotypically, too many foreign players. No incentive whatsoever for premier league clubs to help the national team purely token gestures.
8) the British press. For some reason they are intent on making life as difficult as possible for everyone involved in the national team and always have been.
great post. I agree with all of those points. I would add just one. The fact that the FAPL is a separate organisation. This means that English football cannot effectively channel its financial resources or prioritise it's league organisation in a way which nurtures a strong national team. Unlike in Germany.
I got carried away, the premier league being self governed is kind of where i was going with point 7
It won't ever change for a number of reasons I won't bore you all to death with an in depth assessment but some key reasons are these
1) not enough focus on technique at development level STILL
2) disproportionate revenue distribution. Chelsea and their horrible youth farming policy where they sign up anyone half decent only for then never to get near the first team because they've signed a Dutch 23 year old instead for 35 million
3) the premier league. Ticket prices too high, enormous pressure so nobody gives young players a go
4) English players themselves not moving abroad to test themselves or even just to play in a top tier. Too content to draw a wage and constantly schlepping about on loan until they are 24 and get released
5) the FA, they tie managers up and hang them out to dry. They do not support them when big decisions are needed
6) a lack of desire from English coaches to go abroad and learn. No nation has a monopoly on how best to do things but if you are only used to the English way we will always be at a disadvantage.
7) stereotypically, too many foreign players. No incentive whatsoever for premier league clubs to help the national team purely token gestures.
8) the British press. For some reason they are intent on making life as difficult as possible for everyone involved in the national team and always have been.
great post. I agree with all of those points. I would add just one. The fact that the FAPL is a separate organisation. This means that English football cannot effectively channel its financial resources or prioritise it's league organisation in a way which nurtures a strong national team. Unlike in Germany.
And that for me is one of the key issues.
In Germany, their DFB's close relationship with Bundesliga clubs helps to bring top quality kids through. In England, we have the FA trying to do one thing and then the premier league who only care about their product and don't give a shit about bringing kids through.
According to Uefa, Germany has 28,400 (England 1,759) coaches with the B licence, 5,500 (895) with the A licence and 1,070 (115) with the Pro licence, the highest qualification.
It doesn't take a genius to work out that over time the Germans will quite likely produce better players.
Fills me with gloom in the approach to English football going forward,
Hodgson better pray we beat Iceland or he won't be able to tread foot in England it just makes you wonder what fruit or vegetable he will have his head imposed on
Don't get the criticism of Hodgson at all, he has been cautious in the past but you could argue the players at his disposal forced that somewhat.
His formations and team selections so far at this tournament, and in Brazil have been largely attacking and we are playing passing football. I don't think there is anything non-progressive about Roy's approach to the matches.
Fills me with gloom in the approach to English football going forward,
Hodgson better pray we beat Iceland or he won't be able to tread foot in England it just makes you wonder what fruit or vegetable he will have his head imposed on
Iceland and Northern Ireland have already as good as won the tournament - such is the scale of their achievement. Add Wales to that list when they make the quarters.
Comments
Between 1996 and the 2010 World Cup there seemed to be an emphasis on Football in England which was to change the style of play and how kids played the game based on whoever won the last Major Tournament... When Brazil managed it everyone we should play like them, when Spain did it, everyone once again said we should change our approach.
For me we've almost got to forget trying to win a competition and concentrate on working on building an established team.
I used the Icelandic National Team and British Cycling as I see them as perfect examples both have been built from the foundations and are beginning to see the fruits of their labour; Iceland having built the indoor facilities have now qualified for a Major Tournament and who knows where that'll end...
British Cycling on the other hand have seen the fruits of their labours here and now... Chris Hoy / Mark Cavendish / Bradley Wiggins and Chris Froome are the main names to have turned Britain into one of the most dangerous countries in the Sport.
For both these, the size of the country hasn't mattered, instead both have simply installed new ideas sprinkled with a bit of patience.
1) not enough focus on technique at development level STILL
2) disproportionate revenue distribution. Chelsea and their horrible youth farming policy where they sign up anyone half decent only for then never to get near the first team because they've signed a Dutch 23 year old instead for 35 million
3) the premier league. Ticket prices too high, enormous pressure so nobody gives young players a go
4) English players themselves not moving abroad to test themselves or even just to play in a top tier. Too content to draw a wage and constantly schlepping about on loan until they are 24 and get released
5) the FA, they tie managers up and hang them out to dry. They do not support them when big decisions are needed
6) a lack of desire from English coaches to go abroad and learn. No nation has a monopoly on how best to do things but if you are only used to the English way we will always be at a disadvantage.
7) stereotypically, too many foreign players. No incentive whatsoever for premier league clubs to help the national team purely token gestures.
8) the British press. For some reason they are intent on making life as difficult as possible for everyone involved in the national team and always have been.
Especially now, we're through to the Last 16 yet the Media well and truly have their knives out; Shearer is banging on about Hodgson not knowing his squad... Martin Samuel is saying we've got the Football version of Stuart Lancaster when we need an Eddie Jones
What are they all going to do if we somehow win the competition?
Just chuck those articles in the bin and wheel out the patriotic ones that say they were always behind the team
Germany prior to the 2014 World Cup went out to view their base and their team psychiatrist said that the area wasnt small enough and to break up the hostile atmosphere between Bayern and Dortmund, Low simply mixed them together forcing them to get along.
Even the prick Rio Ferdinand said in the same video that he'd get together with England and all the players from the big clubs were more interested in trying to ensure that a player from a rival club didnt get one over them for the Premier League title.
Really think that we should try to take that same German approach in how the players get together.
Its stupid because from what I read it sounds like Hodgson has been doing a good job of installing that attitude, but will no doubt be gone after these Euros because the armchair fans / the pundits and the media wont think he's good enough
Players were constantly turning back into each other, passes were sloppy at times and over hit often, there was a lack of decisive movement and we did not get down the flanks and stretch them at pace nearly enough.
First half great but we didn't have enough about us, or a plan B to go to in the 2nd half and it showed. For a team with 10 behind the ball, Wayne Rooney coming on is not going to force them to change what they had been doing - it changed nothing and was just a different player doing the exact same things.
He has to get the big decisions right.
Not to attack a poor Russian side or play a high line in the last 15 minutes was a shocker. Only a fully match fit Jack Wiltshere could have unlocked that Slovakian defense. In the first half he proved Why Leeds have had 6 managers since he last played 90 minutes !
Drinkwater should have been in the squad for either
Henderson/Wiltshere (fitness issues) plus Townsend for that Man city reserve player Sterling who is a shadow of the Liverpool player of 18 months ago. I like others said that at the Time, Roy who earns the big bucks thought he knew better.
The population line is one I've never really understood. Uruguay have a population of just over three million. A third of London. Very good team (historically and generally).
India and China - over two and a half billion people between them. Very poor teams. Larger populations don't necessary translate into having better teams or players. It goes much deeper than that. If football was that simple, no-one would ever watch it.
So I still find a Czech Republic fan laughing at England bizarre. To use a playground analogy, it's like a kid who got a D in GCSE maths taking the mickey out of his mate who "only" got a B. Odd.
It's notable that Dier really looks the part, disciplined defensively but also capable of getting forward effectively. Perhaps we should send all out young players to Portugal for their development!
The stats in the book are far from perfect, and got quite widely panned by statisticians because it was overly simplistic - but either way, I thought it was really interesting - and one of their main points was that that population size is a big factor.
In the end it claims that for these reasons the United States, Japan, China and Turkey would likely challenge the European football establishment in the future. I think it was a year or two after it was published that the States went on to finish ahead of us in the World Cup group stages.
I think the only really criticism I have of England so far is that there has been a bit of a lack of cutting edge, but apart from that we have looked as good as we have done at a major tournament for, knocking on, 20 years. For all the fact that the results have been a little uninspiring I think this has a very different feel to recent failures at tournaments.
I actually think that England's touch,close control and passing in tight spaces has been as good as I can remember. We're far from the most technically gifted team at the finals but we're better than average for an England team. Even Spain have struggled to break down massed ranks defence and that is all that England have faced so far.
The fact is it is very hard to score goals against teams that only want to defend.
Eddie Jones from Australia made a fantastic call when he took Burrell off and put Ford on in the 1st Rugby test against Australia.
Cappello was a poor international manager, treating the players like children and yet earned a fortune at Russia as well where he was rubbish. Erickson who had a top squad wasn't capable of doing any coaching his self,
I would like to see 2 million a year given for a manager of England with a bonus of 2 million if we get to a final and another 2 million if we win it.
They wouldn't be paying out anytime soon with some of the decisions that are made in the tournament since 1990 in WC and 1996 in Euros.
Winning all the games in easy qualifying really means nothing when in the heat of competitions.
And that for me is one of the key issues.
In Germany, their DFB's close relationship with Bundesliga clubs helps to bring top quality kids through. In England, we have the FA trying to do one thing and then the premier league who only care about their product and don't give a shit about bringing kids through.
According to Uefa, Germany has 28,400 (England 1,759) coaches with the B licence, 5,500 (895) with the A licence and 1,070 (115) with the Pro licence, the highest qualification.
It doesn't take a genius to work out that over time the Germans will quite likely produce better players.
Gareth Southgate
Roy hodgson
Fills me with gloom in the approach to English football going forward,
Hodgson better pray we beat Iceland or he won't be able to tread foot in England it just makes you wonder what fruit or vegetable he will have his head imposed on
His formations and team selections so far at this tournament, and in Brazil have been largely attacking and we are playing passing football. I don't think there is anything non-progressive about Roy's approach to the matches.