Love him or hate him, you can't help but listen to him, I find there is usually a good viewpoint behind his rants, he's definetly a character, and football needs characters. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-Ferguson-coach-English-national-team-s-.html I have him right on the "golden generation" tag....only the English press can glamourize years of winning nothing, not even made a final. On Ferguson, "crap coach, couldn't even set the cones out!"
Is he still quoting Nietzsche? "Those who cannot put their thoughts on ice, should not enter into the heat of the debate."
He's looking for headlines with what he's saying. There's some truth in it but he's using Ferguson as an example without even having worked with him(I assume) as it gets greater coverage.
i dunno why he brough Fergie into, probably for coverage like YV said. However, all the stuff he says about the coaches, the england team and the FA is bang on the money
He isn't uncomlimentary about Ferguson, just that he doesn't do the coaching side. He must have played with ex Utd players, and so it's probably fair comment. I don't know, but I would assume Redknapp isn't a coach, what him and Fergie do well is the motivational side of the game. By force of their personality that get teams to play beyond expectations. From what he's said Redknapp is the anti Coach ("just go out and express yourself")
I like Barton because at least he's got views and isn't afraid to put them out there. Sure some of them I really don't agree with but I guess thats kind of the point. Where I think he falls through is that he utterly fails to appreciate the other side of an argument, if you follow him on Twitter you get the feeling that once he holds a viewpoint thats it - nobody else is ever right again.
I like Joey Barton. Always found him to be intelligent and articulate (for a footballer) when ever he gives an interview. No Lampard-style "obviouslys" or Beckham-style "erms" from him, in every sentence.
I would actually welcome him as a breath of fresh air if he didn't have a history of beating up children. I mean, thugs are one thing, but Barton is such a scummy thug.
He was surprisingly insightful and eloquent. I know this won't be popular as I'm a foreigner and an Arsenal fan but he's right about the English FA and young English players. There seems to be no new ideas or creativity coming out of the youth set up. I know this idea would be met with a lot of criticism but perhaps bringing in advisers and consultants from Holland, France, Germany, Spain, etc. could do the national team a lot of good in the long run.
Don't worry, I don't think Jack "UKIP" Wilshere posts on our board He's right to criticise the FA but I think Redknapp was far more accurate by just pointing out that the FA aren't "football people" and aren't fit to be in charge of deciding which direction we take our country's football at the highest level, let alone every level. The FA's solution so far has been to create schemes to get more coaches to qualify, like in Spain, which is a typical approach for a "suit" to take. Of course it's beneficial to our game but our problems with the national team don't stem from not having enough people with a certificate that shows they can all put cones out, hand out bibs and conduct identical training sessions. One of the biggest problems English football faces is identity. We have outdated methods running through game like a stick of rock and you can see the effects even in the media. Foreign players and managers are coming in at the highest level and bringing in new ideas and practices which are sorely needed, something Barton touched on. We can train up as many new coaches as we want but so long as they're being taught to pass the same exams by the same plain thinkers we're just going to get a bigger generation of new coaches that look at the game in the same old fashioned manner. The national team is a great reflection of this, look how far behind we're falling with the same old boring players, the same old boring tactics and the interchangeable boring managers.
Agreed. Also, I think Jack came out sounding like an idiot. Even parroting that "tough in the tackle" English bulldog nonsense. Oddly enough, I support England because the US national team doesn't interest me. There's none of the "soap opera" entertainment like you get with England. As for the FA, you make a good point that none of them are football people. Old men with old ideas. Out of curiosity, what would you do to fix what appears to be cultural problem within the England set up?
Is Barton autistic? He seems to have a lot of the signs - clearly intelligent, but has little common sense and a tendency to behave very irrationally with bouts of aggression and violence.
My fellow American: I feel similarly about US vs. England team. The England team is so much more fun, not in how they play but in the wildly dysfunctional three ring circus that surrounds them at al times. I don't understand exactly why it is England has such trouble moving forward in football, except to speculate it's the combination of inventing the game, and it being the national game. When I think of what characterizes English and British sports, I think of all of the innovative coaches and trainers, from Coe's dad through all the great rowers to some of the boxing people. I don't know why when it comes to football the hidebound always seems to come out on top.
I think it's a combination of many things. For example, and I mean no offense, England fans are hopelessly pessimistic. I once read somewhere that "there are two kinds of England games, the 'false dawn' and the 'reality check'". I think that sums up the feelings of many fans. There's also the tabloids and gutter press who seemingly hover over each and every player just waiting to turn the miniscule into some national story. That segment of the media in the UK have no standards or accountability and I believe they hurt the national team as a whole.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2320283/Joey-Barton-banned-games-Thiago-Silva-overweight-ladyboy-tweets.html
I think there's too much priority placed on results at the lower levels, players are encouraged to play to their strengths and never seem to develop the technical side of the game. The result is that we have pacey, strong players coming through who never really improve beyond a certain point whilst those who don't have the physical presence don't get the opportunities so fade out of the game. It's also the style that is played at some youth levels too that needs looking at as the old 442 hoof and rush is still too common and promotes the same physiciality over skill imbalance. I appreciate that the FA have given a young, English manager in Southgate a go but was he really the best choice? Time will tell(he's made a good start) but if you compare his experience of floundering around the bottom of the table with Boro to some of the youth coaches around at Premier League sides, who have extensive tactical knowledge and years of experience working with young players, then it seems like a strange choice. Surely he wasn't the best qualified for the role? It's another example of the FA making a decision based on ticking boxes that make them an amiable choice to them, rather than addressing the issues that they're supposed to be. Gareth Southgate: English? Check. Young? Check. Uncontroversial? Check. Chummy with the FA? Check.... shows where there priorities are when he's never had a proper youth coaching role, has limited management experience, no success in management and no history of playing the kind of technical football we're supposed to be trying to promote for our national sides.
