Robbo
Paul Walsh
Maybe it could work to your advantage, lowering the (normally) ridiculous media expectations on the team?
Perhaps being underdogs is what England need to actually have a decent run in the tournament.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
YOUR England 23 man World cup squad
- Thread starter Kingdawson
- Start date
Maybe it could work to your advantage, lowering the (normally) ridiculous media expectations on the team?
Perhaps being underdogs is what England need to actually have a decent run in the tournament.
I
indianspur
Guest
its great these players are getting top international tournament experience. It will help the youngsters especially for the 2016 EC and 2018 WC. Brazil 2014 was always a write off anyway. The golden generation have had their chances and are now past it, there is a lack of talent at the peak ages, so its only right to blood the next generation of youngsters.
Rorschach
Ricky Villa
I have to disagree on this. Caps should be awarded primarily merit IMO. I don't mean a good game every now and then but consistency over a season, and for that reason Wheelchair has no right to be on the plane. He's had a few highlights, including one amazing team goal he finished off (****s), which masked a very ordinary and injured plagued season. He was being roundly slaughtered over on Arsenal Mania most of the time and although some fans do tend to kneekjerk I do think they have it about right in this case. The stumpy little prick can count himself lucky to be going.
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
Agreed, I think something like that could really work better than just "the 11 best players".
Said the same last Euros when United had a very strong team with plenty of English players.
Probably more about bringing different options/player types I would think. Gerrard will most likely play Carrick's role, the two of them wouldn't really function as a duo I think. So do you bring Carrick as a direct backup to Gerrard, after a disappointing season, or do you bring in someone who gives you something a bit different?
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
:lol: Good one!
Without a doubt, that's the best team.
despite the lack of too many worldclass players this time round, i've realised england do have a lot of squad players. they could've made two more teams that aren't much worse in terms of quality to whatever the starting 11 will be imo.
---------------ruddy--------------
walker---ferdinand---terry---cole
------cleverely---carrick---------
walcott--------young--------lennon
---------------defoe--------------
--------------carson--------------
richards---lescott---dawson---rose
------huddlestone---barry---------
townsend---------------------gibbs
------rodriguez-----carroll-------
---------------ruddy--------------
walker---ferdinand---terry---cole
------cleverely---carrick---------
walcott--------young--------lennon
---------------defoe--------------
--------------carson--------------
richards---lescott---dawson---rose
------huddlestone---barry---------
townsend---------------------gibbs
------rodriguez-----carroll-------
I wouldn't play Gerrard. He won't stick to his duties, but run around all over the pitch as he usually does when he decides to be a one man team.
Henderson over Milner??? No amount of club experience can make up for the gulf in ability between Henderson and Milner.
EDIT: Barkley and Milner are both immeasurably better options than Henderson. If we are going by Liverpool teammates we might as well have called up Flanagan (who is also gash).
Last edited:
And in doing so rip the only deep-lying creative midfielder out of the heart of the team? I don't think so.
No matter your opinion on Gerrard, he will be absolutely central to England's success/failure this World Cup.
the more i watch gerrard, i get the feeling that he isnt really good enough technically to be labelled a creative midfielder. and i don't agree that hes the only deep-lying creative midfielder for england. thats Wheelchair.
Cochise
Steve Carr
A lot of the ex pro's/managers/pundits always talk about how it is good to have club partnerships in an international team. The synergy will already be there as it has built up over the course of a year and even a month's worth of training sessions + one or two friendlies can't replace that. Some international teams are slow to get going whilst they find their feet together, in the group stages we will need every advantage we can get and having a team that are already on the same wavelength is a big plus.
As for Barkley, I think he's a great player but as one of the deeper two in that three man midfield he would be wasted. For me he is the furthest forward of the midfielders, which means either switching out Lallana, Sterling or Rooney.
There is obviously something to be said for the first point, but there has to be a limit surely?
When you look at what someone like Henderson really offers to the Liverpool team, it becomes very much clear that he is replaceable and as such not integral to England's chances at the World Cup. His near ever-presence next to Gerrard is not a wholly good thing - it is also a sign of Gerrard's limitations and how they were managed by Rodgers with the players he had at his disposal. Gerrard has never had supreme control or agility in tight spaces (though to exclude Gerrard from the category of 'creative midfielder' on this basis is diabolical); this, coupled with his declining pace, render the inclusion of a 'workhorse' like Henderson vital. A willing runner, with defensive qualities, who is fluent in a pressing game that can afford Gerrard the extra seconds he may need to perfect a 60 yard pass, is what is required and is evident in Henderson. But realistically, Henderson is a weak link in the team and is made important only by the paucity of players with his qualities in the Liverpool squad.
Hodgson, on the other hand, has a much better selection of players to pick from that can quite easily perform Henderson's limited role and offer more in the same/other areas. Milner and Barkley are these players. In Milner especially we are talking about a seasoned professional who has won two titles and captained England, playing with some of the best players in the world week-in, week-out, while Henderson was one of the central foci for ridicule of Liverpool until this season, classed in the same league as Downing and Carroll - he has only been elevated from these depths because his limited ability has been maximally utilised in the Liverpool team. Milner is often explicitly used in the 'workhorse' role for City and easily matches Henderson in all of his tangible qualities. In terms of the intangibles - Milner has vast experience compared to Henderson and while he cannot match the latter's partnership with Gerrard, will have played with him for England. In all I think Milner offers far more than Henderson, and the fact that Gerrard and Henderson are club-mates should not outweigh the other factors cited above over the course of the tournament. In the first game? Maybe, but even then, his and Milner's defining qualities may be less relevant against Italy, with Gerrard getting more time on the ball and someone a little more technical and perhaps less physical required, such as Wheelchair or even Barkley.
Thereafter, if a player like Henderson is required, Milner is the obvious choice.
Regarding the second point: Barkley is not creative enough to be the most advanced central midfielder. England's main problem in putting together a decent international team recently is a lack of creativity, someone who can unpick a defense where it seems there is no space. Barkley is just not this player, and to take out either of Rooney or Lallana takes out the two players most capable of playing these sorts of balls. And for all you Arsenal apologists - Wheelchair is not this player either, very rarely does he split a defense.
In terms of potential box-to-box midfielders available to England, Wheelchair is undoubtedly the most capable passer of him, Barkley, Milner and Henderson, and is capable on the ball more generally - he will have his use in games where space is tight and additional box-to-box creativity from is needed to assist Gerrard and Lallana - but he does not offer quite the same threat as Barkley's power. Playing Barkley at #10 would detract from his ability to use this power, which most readily manifests itself (coupled with his technical ability) in his on and off the ball running.
England have more suitable candidates to play in the hole than Barkley, and he is more suited to a slightly deeper role anyway. Again, I think he would be suited to the 'workhorse' role next to Gerrard, and offers more than Henderson by virtue of his exceptional ability to drive with the ball.
I realise that in reality, Milner will be used on the right as a massive drain on the team's creativity, while Henderson will further drain this creativity when played in the centre. Lallana will probably start on the bench, and as always Rooney and Gerrard will not live up to the thankless task of providing for the whole England team. But please, Hodgson, if you're reading this, Gerrard, Lallana and Rooney are the most important midfielders; complement them with Milner, Barkley and Wheelchair as you see fit, but do not pick Henderson!!
Ah what do I care, it's only England.
His passing does more than enough to qualify him, regardless of his technical deficiencies (if you can call them that).
Wheelchair is not 'deep-lying', he does not sit back and find holes from which he can pick passes a la Gerrard, Pirlo, Huddlestone, and other talismanic playmakers. He often raids very far forward and I would rather classify him as 'box-to-box'. He lies deep at times, but mostly attempts to enhance his team's attacks with his running and quick passing on the move, he is not yet capable of running a game with his passing alone; Gerrard is.
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
Best option available, particularly with Carrick not going.
Gerrard has been fairly disciplined for Liverpool in that role. Unsurprisingly he's been less disciplined for England when he's been asked to play the holding role before, when that's been a role very different to his club role. Often he's been asked to be the most defensive out of him and Lampard for example, when at club level he's been the most attacking of him and Mascherano or Lucas or even playing with the freedom of two deeper players behind him in Mascherano and Alonso.
The last half a season has essentially been his first extended period playing the deeper role at club level I think. And I think he will be a lot more ready to do the same for England now as a result.
Disagree completely about Henderson, he's certainly not gash.
The reasonable (yeah, not a ton of them) Liverpool fans I've talked to have rated Henderson very highly and as a clear first choice player for next season. They were very upset about him getting the ban as they thought he would be a massive loss. They see Flanagan as a good local lad type player, but someone perhaps for the future and someone they should look to upgrade on this summer.
I don't think Milner is as suited to the role next to Gerrard myself. Milner runs a lot and puts in a lot of effort, but I think Henderson is significantly more athletic and I think that's key in that role next to the now aging Gerrard. And I rate Milner quite a bit.
ok i see your point regarding both Wheelchair and gerrard. the problem i have with labelling gerrard a creative midfielder is if you compare him to other world class players (which gerrard was at one point) in the creative midfield role, he stands out like a sore thumb because he would be the weakest player on the ball. i personally think its precisely because of players like him that england have done so bad. he looks for the "killer ball" far too often and kills any rythem that england could potentially build up. and because hes not great on the ball and turns over possession a lot more than his counterparts, england are too often on the back foot. i think in the modern game, a side aiming to be world class cannot have someone as weak as him on the ball playing the ball playing central midfield role.
These are quotes from Paul Scholes (arguably england's best player technically in the past decade) as to why he retired from international duty:
"I just got fed up. When you are going to a team, you want to be part of a team and play well, but there are individuals who are after personal glory...When there is a simple pass of 10 yards, they might try and smack it 80 yards. They will do things to try and get themselves noticed... That is the biggest problem with English players – most of them are too selfish."
Although these quotes were not aimed directly at any one individual, i think it highlights what scholes thought was wrong with the national team. and i think it shows why england have done so poorly on the international stage. the midfielders we produce are too much in the mould of steven gerrard. he epitomises what the average england fan thinks makes a top class midfielder. and as a result, young children try to emulate his style of play.
i think that style of playing in midfield is getting a bit outdated now. football has evolved and as a result i think we need as many jack Wheelchair's as possible in our midfield. at the top level, football is about short rapid passes now. how many goals have there been from 20+ yard killer balls this season in the premier league? it just doesnt happen anymore. more and more goals now are coming from teams working the ball to the byline and cutting it across the 6 yard box. this is what guys like Wheelchair, mata, ozil, silva, iniesta are great at. working the ball in and around the box at speed. these are the creative midfielders of today. not steven gerrard.
people often credit the likes of pirlo, xabi alonso, schweinsteiger and xavi for their ability to play long balls, but i don't think this is the skill that makes them standout in their positions. what makes them special isnt so different to what makes Wheelchair or iniesta special. its these guys' ability to execute short rapid passes and recycle the ball efficiently that makes them so good. gerrard unfortunately just isnt as good as these guys at this.
i think england need to move away from the lampard and gerrard types of midfielders in the future. its ok to have one of these guys obviously. especially if they can provide a goal threat. but generally, i think we should look to have as many "genuine creative midfielders" (guys who can actually manipulate the ball well) in our midfield, a la Wheelchair, lallana, oxlade-chamberlain.
yh i don't see much in it between henderson and milner tbh. but i would probably go with henderson too. just because football is a confidence game, and henderson is probably thinking he is the new zidane atm.
as for flanagan, i cannot believe how he has made it in the 30man sqaud. gibbs and rose are far better than him. flanagan is just another jay spearing. but has somehow fitted in seamlessly this season into a confident liverpool side. long term, he wont be good enough tho. i think theres more chance of him playing championship football than premier league football in four years time.