Whatever your views on the chosen players for England's Euro 2012 squad, one defining fact that I noticed, when reading through the list, is that every single one of them, including the stand-by players, play their club football in England. Do you think that is a good thing? (all used to the same style so should gel quickly into a footballing unit) or a bad thing? (shortage of experience of the varying styles of play on the continent so could be at a disadvantage compared to a more "cosmopolitan" team)
It's a bad thing really, on the basis that they are the ONLY good English players (a few exceptions) and as such are used by the English clubs in europe to fill their quotas. Wouldn't it be nice to have the situation where the English clubs have great players, but there were so many good English players that some applied their trade in Spain, Italy, Germany etc.
You could make the argument that it is bad that few English players are making it abroad, however one could argue that those that do try their hands in other countries do get overlooked by the media and pundits such as Carson, Joe Cole, Michael Mancienne and Dale Jennings. Maybe none of them are England international quality but many players may feel that there is little incentive to take a risk if wages are lower then the Premiership and they will get sidelined or overlooked. But to counter this argument it should be remembered that the Spnaish squad that has been dominant over the last few years was made up of pretty much all players plying their trade in their home country (a few game to England) and the Italian World Cup winners of 2006 were all playing in Serie A.
