Football Focus

[Rivercider]

I don’t really recall England being more successful before more overseas players were allowed (except in the sixties - where the World Cup result was at “home” and the final rather freakish, if enjoyable). That has been tried.

 

How does the time spent together as an England team compare to other countries, for example? Maybe we still play too many league matches, perhaps?

 

With a population of over 50m (?) we should have our share of talent. Costa Rica and Uruguay (just to quote two countries) have minuscule populations in comparison.

 

Best, Pete.

I would agree that there are too many league matches played, all the decent sides will then have a significant number of european competition matches to play.

 

I wonder how many people regularly play football at grass roots level below the bottom of the pyramid? There are a lot of other sports for young people to take up,

maybe in England the potential pool of talent is spread more thinly over football, rugby, cricket, hockey etc. Would there be as many other popular sports played in Uruguay for instance?

 

cheers 

[trisonic]

That’s a good argument except that in the case of Uruguay their total population is about half that of London alone. So even if England's ball-playing talent is diluted by different sports it shouldn’t make any difference, in comparison.

 

Just checked with Wiki (because I didn’t recall any other sports being played when I was last there). Apparently Soccer was introduced into Uruguay in the late 19th century by the English influx of “labourers” (what the heck were they doing down there). Rugby and Cricket were also introduced by us at the same time with less success (so our cunning plan failed). Apparently 1,400 + Uruguayan soccer players have currently left the country to play for clubs in other countries (about the same as for Argentina and Brazil) and legislation is being considered to prevent this “drain” of their players - which seems a bit harsh!

 

Best, Pete.

Edited June 20, 2014 by trisonic

[gwrrob]

Although he can be over the top sometimes I really enjoyed this rant of his after last nights game.Like me he's [Waddle] fed up with the same old story every four years.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02191f7

[trisonic]

Although he can be over the top sometimes I really enjoyed this rant of his after last nights game.Like me he's [Waddle] fed up with the same old story every four years.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02191f7

I’ve been hearing this since 1970.....after all when additional overseas players were allowed it was not to make our national team worse but rather one of the arguments was it would make our league players better by being exposed to the play of "better” footballers.

 

Probably the whole concept need to be reviewed across the board - from the school player to top pros.

 

Best, Pete.

Edited June 20, 2014 by trisonic

[Joseph_Pestell]

That’s a good argument except that in the case of Uruguay their total population is about half that of London alone. So even if England's ball-playing talent is diluted by different sports it shouldn’t make any difference, in comparison.

 

Just checked with Wiki (because I didn’t recall any other sports being played when I was last there). Apparently Soccer was introduced into Uruguay in the late 19th century by the English influx of “labourers” (what the heck were they doing down there). Rugby and Cricket were also introduced by us at the same time with less success (so our cunning plan failed). Apparently 1,400 + Uruguayan soccer players have currently left the country to play for clubs in other countries (about the same as for Argentina and Brazil) and legislation is being considered to prevent this “drain” of their players - which seems a bit harsh!

 

Best, Pete.

 

I think you will find the labourers were building railways (making this a suitable RMWeb topic). Certainly Argentina's railways were built by Brits and Irish.

 

It depends what you mean by "less success". Rugby and cricket are very minor sports in Argentina (in terms of numbers of players). But there are some good players and their international rugby team has turned over quite a few of the major nations. "More success would presumably mean England" losing to Uruguay at cricket - they have managed it against Holland recently.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Joseph_Pestell

[cary hill]

I don’t really recall England being more successful before more overseas players were allowed (except in the sixties - where the World Cup result was at “home” and the final rather freakish, if enjoyable). That has been tried.

 

How does the time spent together as an England team compare to other countries, for example? Maybe we still play too many league matches, perhaps?

 

With a population of over 50m (?) we should have our share of talent. Costa Rica and Uruguay (just to quote two countries) have minuscule populations in comparison.

 

Best, Pete.

 

England didn't do too badly in the 1990 World Cup Finals or Euro '96.

 

I would think Euro '96 was perhaps the last time when England would perhaps have had three or four quality players available for selection in each position, before the Premier League big boys started to sign up foreign talent in a big way followed subsequently by the rest of the Premier League and the Championship to a certain extent.

 

Twenty years on the cupboard is pretty bare in most positions.

 

The local team (Leicester) just got promotion to the Premier League and we've already got a Dane, a Belgian, a Ghanaian, an Algerian, a Pole and a Frenchman, who are first team regulars. and so the team is already well on the way to minority English representation just like the majority of Premiership teams.

 

The demands of the Premiership/Sky global brand and a successful England team will always be mutually incompatible.

Edited June 20, 2014 by cary hill

[Horsetan]

The way Costa Rica have been playing, there's more chance of them winning 4-nil.

....well, almost. They beat Italy 1-nil.

[Mike Kieran]

If you count population int the factor, then the United States trumps all. We probably have more people playing soccer than in all of Europe and, for that matter, more facilities/soccer facilities at our disposal. By that formula, the United States should dominate soccer.

 

It's not about population, but about player development, preparation, and strategy. When I think of English soccer, I think of a bull in a china shop. Premier League is a lot more physical with less emphasis on finesse/ball handling than Serie A and La Liga.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Mike Kieran

[gordon s]

Just got back from a holiday in Spain which was a great place to be when they went out after two games.  Of course it wasn't so great when Italy beat us and even worse last night.  Just got home to the inevitable news and that's it…All over.

 

Come on Holland..or Belgium. 

 

Oh that Suarez had an English grandmother...

[mow]

Saw this on Wikepedia not long ago.

 

"Roy Hodgson - Wikipedia, the free encycIopedia

enwikipedi&org/wiki/Roy_Hodgson

Roy Hodgson (born 9 August 1947) is an English former footballer who was the manager of the England national football team He was sacked on 20th June"

 

The account had been hacked.

[298]

If you count population int the factor, then the United States trumps all. We probably have more people playing soccer than in all of Europe and, for that matter, more facilities/soccer facilities at our disposal. By that formula, the United States should dominate soccer.

 

 

In the US, Soccer is seen as a Girl's game...

[cary hill]

"On 20 October 2013, Hodgson and Rio Ferdinand were appointed to the Football Association's commission to improve the state of the national game" (Wiki).......Cracking start then ......unless reaching a 56 year nadir as a starting point was part of the plan.

Edited June 20, 2014 by cary hill

[Mike Kieran]

In the US, Soccer is seen as a Girl's game...

20 years ago that was the case. There's a bigger grass roots following now. Just remember, "soccer mom" is more of the American lifestyle than it was previously. Soccer leagues have increased exponentially. Programs are starting for kids as young as 1 year old. When my daughter is born in November (fellow Scorpio), SWMBO (She Who Must Be Obeyed) and I are signing her up so that we can work on her motor skills.

[mow]

On youtube there is a Downfall parody - Hitler finds out the score from the Uruguay England game.

[cary hill]

The Queen will be pleased that Italians can't always be relied on:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jun/20/mario-balotelli-england-italy-queen-kiss

 

[jonny777]

I don’t really recall England being more successful before more overseas players were allowed (except in the sixties - where the World Cup result was at “home” and the final rather freakish, if enjoyable). That has been tried.

 

How does the time spent together as an England team compare to other countries, for example? Maybe we still play too many league matches, perhaps?

 

With a population of over 50m (?) we should have our share of talent. Costa Rica and Uruguay (just to quote two countries) have minuscule populations in comparison.

 

Best, Pete.

 

 

What I don't understand is that most (if not all) Premiership clubs have academies and they must have an intake of talented youngsters with promise each season.

 

But what happens to all this potential? Do they all end up as part timers in the lower leagues, or do they just give up because they don't have the determination to put in the effort to get to the top?

 

Or maybe they get hooked on video games, and just can't be arse_d

[pH]

Clive Thomas returns!

[Horsetan]

.... signing her up so that we can work on her motor skills.

What, will she be learning the art of car maintenance?

[tomparryharry]

Sooo Depressed.........

 

Still, at least the 'boys' will have a nice holiday in South America....

 

Never mind, need to get that suntan worked up, only a couple of weeks to the new season, and that's when we start earning big bucks again.....

 

Ian

[darren01]

Blame Sky and the money men, it not about Football anymore it all about money!.

[EddieB]

As someone who avoids anything to do with Murdoch newspapers and Sky TV, I don't buy the simple arguments blaming foreigners in the Premiership or influence of Sky.  There are some barriers, but generally English players aren't prevented from competing at the right level of their ability - whether it be in the Premiership, Championship, one of the lower leagues or a foreign league.  Unlike many teams at the World Cup, our national side is almost exclusively made up of players who play in our own domestic league, they know each other, can meet up and train together far more readily than other countries.  That alone should give us an advantage.

 

I'd say that the fault runs far deeper.  It begins with lack of proper management and leadership at the FA, filters down into poor standards of the national team manager and the coaching staff and is expressed through poorly-motivated lacklustre teams made up of overpaid prima donnas,tactically and technically ill-prepared to compete on equal terms with international teams drawn from similar pools of talent and remuneration.

 

You only have to look at the 2012 Olympics to see the difference in attitude between our athletes and the members of the Team GB soccer team.

[Horsetan]

So...anyone banking on Costa Rica beating England next Tuesday?

[Colin]

I should think the Costa Rica manager might think it's worth a flutter.... odds won't be good though.

[cary hill]

Brazilian Press predicts the England team's much deserved early exit:

 

 

 

 

 

[Steve K]

Time for  Gerrard,  Rooney, Lampard and Johnson to retire. How on earth they could say Rooney played well is beyond me. Oh and close the door on your way out Roy

 

Think you're being harsh on Lampard - he hasn't even been given the chance to be rubbish this time!

 

I hate the England football team, I dont hate England the country, I am very patriotic, but I hate everything about the football set up as it is now, from the FA down.

Employing that cowardly, snide, bluffer. Who didnt even having the balls to back his captain afterwards. The man has never won a thing and his only thing he is good at is lowering expectations. He is tactically inept and out of his depth. He had a great chance with great players and he has played them out of position with basic tactics to shoe horn in a hugely overpaid Wayne Rooney who is well past his best, all to please the media. They used to have this problem with Beckham.

Danny Welbeck is useless too.

 

I want England to do well in the future but not before big changes, Roy to go first.

 

The hatred of him comes from when he was Liverpool's manager where we learned all about him.

 

As a Liverpool supporter.

 

Blimey, Michael, it's only a game! And really, do we think those 2 games were entirely down to Roy? I'd ask what the team psychologist has been doing for his money, if the players always turn into headless chickens when they concede the first goal. Mind you, the idea of Liverpool fans being generous supporters of the wider game has been destroyed for me already this year, but even so, surely you're not still bitter about Roy's tenure, of all things?

 

No one seems to like Johnson, but that is because by being more attack minded he neglects his defensive duties sometimes. Without his cross, Rooney would not have been on the score-sheet. Maybe he would be better utilised as a right sided midfielder.

 

In other words, Glen Johnson is not a defender. He's always been praised for his attacking prowess, but I have no idea why that qualifies him as a left back. James Milner would have been better in both capacities.

 

"On 20 October 2013, Hodgson and Rio Ferdinand were appointed to the Football Association's commission to improve the state of the national game" (Wiki).......Cracking start then ......unless reaching a 56 year nadir as a starting point was part of the plan.

 

Easier to start from the bottom, I suspect...