England squad GK â Hart, Green, Ruddy DF â Baines, Cahill, Cole, Johnson, Jones, Lescott, Terry M â Barry, Downing, Gerrard, Lampard, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Parker, Walcott, Young, Milner S â Carroll, Defoe, Rooney, Welbeck Stand-by list - Butland, Jagielka, Henderson, Adam Johnson, Sturridge. Nice to see Ruddy go, he has had a decent season at Norwich. Totally ****ed off about the inclusion of Terry. It gives completely the wrong image to everyone, he is about to stand trial for racism yet he is still able to represent the country!?!?!?!? WTF??? Nice to see some new-ish faces and some new blood there too, but i still cannot understand the inclusion of Rooney and Carroll. One has only started playing half ok in the last 5 games and the other is a thug. We cannot afford to carry dead weight!!
Only 4 forwards and one suspended for the first 2 games - madness. Would've taken another striker in place of one of Barry, Downing and Milner. Obviously wasn't able to persuade Fozzie to come out of international retirement.
Goalkeepers I agree with - but beyond Hart, no-one will get a look in anyway! If he gets injured/suspended, I think we will struggle to replace! Defenders - I would have taken Richards over Johnson. The Terry case should have been sorted out long before now. Midfielders - I wouldn't have taken Downing, and possibly replaced with another striker, maybe taken a gamble on Bent's fitness Attackers - I wouldn't have taken Carroll, would have taken Crouch. With the suspension of Rooney, I would have taken a 5th striker, but do agree with taking Rooney. He does have that little extra spark we are missing - just as long as he can keep his head.
He's not about to stand trial - the trial is after the Euro finals & we won't know if he is guilty or not until then. If found not guilty, and he hadn't been included, there would probably be an outcry equal to the current one over his inclusion. Not that I'm standing up for him - obnoxious beast that he is - but he is, unfortunately, probably the best central defender that England have. The inclusion of Lescott and Jones surely highlights that. I'm more hacked off over Rooney's selection - not available for two of the group games & has never managed to perform on the international stage anyway. Whoever has to make way for him after his suspension is going to be mightily miffed, especially when he doesn't perform again. As for your argument against Carroll, well they said the same things about Geoff Hurst.
Not happy to see Richards, Sturridge and Adam Johnson left out. Ok with Young, but don't think that Walcott and Downing will do the business on the other side.
Well lets hope that Carroll is the next GH. As for the Terry fiasco he is about to stand trial in that in the near future he is going to be on trial for the offences. Let me put it this way, if you were going to court for an offence you committed in your work place you would likely be suspended pending the result of the trial. However, he is allowed to continue playing and making a fool of himself. Why should he be allowed to represent his country. What image does that give to others?? Its no wonder that we are laughed at.
Roy came across well in the press conference (even if I would have gone for a slightly different side) Time to get behind Roys England
I agree Richards should be there, and i'd take Carrick, and yes, in an ideal world i'd have left Terry to rot....er i mean..at home! Not really sure why Walcott is going, he does very little to excite me. Glad about O-C, but hope he doesn't get built up like Walcott did, coz that'd be another career that doesn't live up to the hype, courtesy of an England manager.
It's an alleged offence - personally I can see no reason why he should be suspended before a verdict is handed down. After all, Suarez wasn't - and there is no doubt that he actually committed the offence, whereas there is doubt over whether Terry did actually say what he is alleged to have said.
There is no doubt at all about what Terry said!! You tell me what you think he is saying here. I am no professional lip reader and i can see it. [video=youtube;OfoaoQImtaI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfoaoQImtaI[/video] As i said before, if you had committed an alleged offence at work, say theft from a till or something you would be suspended pending an investigation and if you were found guilty you would be sacked. Yet he is allowed to play as if nothing has happened.
An eleven second recording that shows neither what was said beforehand nor after - not something that would stand up in any court in any land I'm afraid. I would also argue that Troy Deeney and Darius Henderson both undisputedly committed worse offences - in public view, their normal workplace - yet neither was suspended.
I turn your argument back at you and say you know the bare minimum of facts about those cases. You simply know that they have been charged. You don't know what happened at all. Yet in the video you clearly see that Terry is calling someone a "****ing black ****". Also, the offences committed by Troy and Henderson were outside of their football clubs. Terry committed his offence during a game!! I know which i find more offensive.
Hodgson is blameless in the Terry saga. He has picked a talented, experienced centre back who he believes he can handle. For once, the blame lies outside of football, and squarely with the court system. This should have been done and dusted within 8-10 weeks, regardless of the professions of the people involved. If Terry had already been convicted, Hodgson would not have been allowed to select him. I suppose it is legitimate to talk about a manager taking a moral stance. But how morally would Hodgson have been treated if had voluntarily left Terry out, and the person who came in made an error of Rob Green proportions which knocked us out of the tournament? In Hodgson's situation, he needed to be compelled to drop a player who is good enough, and only a conviction (or the FA knowingly pre-empting a court decision, and opening themselves up to being sued) could have done that. As for the squad, I felt that Zamora or Graham would have been more value in the first two games than Walcott or Downing. But if we manage to get through the group then that's all academic.
Why Downing is in there i don't know. What has he done this season to justify an inclusion? 0 goals and 0 assists from midfield says it all to me. And how he has got 33 caps under his belt is quite laughable!
What the video clearly doesn't show is - as Terry has claimed - him saying the words "I didn't call you" immediately before that, so the four words you object to have been taken out of context. As for Deeney - although admittedly not Henderson - right back at you! The CCTV footage of the 'incident' in which he was involved quite clearly shows the extent of his involvement and there is certainly no ambiguity. Apart from that, he has admitted it - and IMO the fact that he commiited the offence in a public street is far more offensive.
