Phil Neville (59 caps), Nicky Butt (39) and Wes Brown (24) are all comparable regulars to the likes of Cole (56), Ince (53), Carrick (22) and Johnson (34). And all the Utd players mentioned spent almost all their formative years at Utd, playing over 300 games for us, when compared to the West Ham players who were generally out the door by the age of 23 and did much of their development (and won most of their England caps) elsewhere. So whilst West Ham played a part in their development, it'd be hard to argue they did as much for their England careers as Utd did for their players.
They were never first team regulars though, mostly fillers for absentee players. Much like Jamie Carragher, who has 38 caps, I still wouldn't class him as a regular. If that's the case then Liverpool have produced Fowler, McManaman, Carragher, Gerrard and Michael Owen, and that's atleast equal to Man Utd's contribution. You really don't think these comments are ludicrous, that the FA are biased AGAINST Man Utd? The FA are certainly biased, but more so towards the top clubs e.g Liverpool, Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal & Man City, never agaisnt them. Maybe Man Utd did do more for their careers, but you didn't produce the players.
I wouldn't say Carrick and Johnson were first team regulars either, and Cole wasn't a nailed on first choice in the squad for any great length of time. I'd see those players more like Fowler, McManaman and Carragher, who had time in the squad and played important roles in some tournaments but were never as crucial as players like Beckham, Gary Neville, Scholes, Owen, Lampard and Gerrard who made their positions their own for very long periods of time. Personally I don't think there is any systematic bias at the FA, but there is certainly a lot of inconsistency that often rears its head in big decisions involving Utd. The decision to give Rooney an automatic ban for swearing instead of the usual charge of bringing the game into disrepute; the decision to charge SAF for positive comments about Howard Webb, later embarrassingly withdrawn after it was shown that Ancelotti and Pulis had made identical comments and not been charged; and the decision to apply a Rooney sending off from a friendly match to PL games all spring to mind as decisions that have been made against Utd when other clubs / players escaped without them. Of course it is all a symptom of the higher media profile which in turn means that we tend to get more decisions at OT, same as Liverpool at Anfield, Chelsea at SB etc. But it still doesn't send out a particularly good image when the FA can be shown to be so inconsistent in its treatment of clubs based on their media profile. Err, how did we not produce them? They came through the United academy into the United team and then played for England. If that's not producing a player for the national team then what is?
Johnson has been the first choice right back ever since Neville ****ed off in my opinion. Carrick probably wasn't, and Joe Cole was only a regular for one tournament, so I'll give you those two. Johnson will most likely be the right back throughout Euro 2012 and probably the 2014 world cup (if England qualify). And what about the Rooney elbow fiasco? If the FA were biased in any way, shape or form they've would've punished Rooney, and Man Utd, for that incident. They didn't though, purely because they aren't biased, just inept like all other football organisations, its nothing to do with your media profile or hatred of your club. I was assuming you were talking about the players who you had signed from lesser clubs and improved certain aspects of their games with this comment: No?
Load of bollocks, if anything, you're the new KPR, making pointless, snide comments from the sideline while adding nothing to the actual discussion. Actually its unfair to compare you to KPR, he has a slightly better understanding of football than you do.
I would argue that Johnson may not even be Liverpool's first choice right back by the time the 2014 World Cup comes around never mind England's, I think Kelly will of taken his place in both squads. The same could be said about the ban Rooney received for saying "****ing what" at the camera, I can't recall anyone else receiving a ban for swearing while celebrating, and it's not as if plenty of other players don't scream "****ing get in" at camera's all the time.
I come here for Banter and only banter, I dont give a **** for stats, other than stats on silverware. and like you, I dont bite. So when are you bringing KPR back?
Johnson is only 1st choice because we are appallingly low in quality in that area imo. It's not like Neville, who was first choice over players like Lee Dixon and Carragher - Johnson gets the nod by default. Even then he was close to being replaced by Brown before his injuries in 08/09 and 09/10. I'd expect Smalling, Kelly or even Kyle Walker to replace Johnson by 2014, if not by 2012. The Rooney fiasco was no worse than the Gerrard ones against Welbeck and Brown. At least there the FA was acting clearly and consistently in line with the rules - if the ref sees the incident and deals with it there can be no retroactive punishment. Like I said, it's not about bias, it's about consistency. The Rooney swearing into the camera was punished purely because it was on lunchtime TV. Had it been a 3pm Saturday match, or had it not been a high profile player, it would have been swept under the carpet with a £10k fine and a warning. Or even ignored, like when Rooney swore into the camera during the World Cup for England. Likewise with SAF's comments on Webb - the FA ignored comments like that when Ancelotti and Pulis made them cos they didn't appear in the papers. As soon as SAF made them they were in the Daily Mail and the FA acted. No. I meant that whilst players like Beckham, Scholes, both Nevilles, Butt and Brown were all made into full England internationals and important players for England in major tournaments whilst at Utd, the six West Ham players you named never played any major role for England at West Ham. All of them needed to move clubs and gain exposure to different experiences, managers and training before they were good enough to make the grade for England. So on that basis Utd have made a greater contribution than West Ham.
IDIOT, who havent we "produced"?? Scholes? Neville? Beckham all at the club at 12, giggs after he was 14 and there are more, you are boring mate
To be honest i don't even see that Johnson is our first choice RB now let alone in 2014. Kelly and Johnson are on par in the pecking order and i personally feel Kelly has so much more to offer as a RB than Johnson. It all depends whether Kelly gets put back to CB, his natural position. Johnson is a very useful member of the squad though, as last season when Kelly took the RB position Glen was capable of filling in at LB to a very high standard. If Kelly remains as a RB he will surely be involved in the next world cup. I can't think of any better young English RB's out there..?
Swarbs. I have already suggested that you may possibly be KPR. So deflecting your own issues with ludicrous accusations only backs my claim up. Why don't you go and suck bacon face off and also bankrupt a few shopping centres while you're at it.
Possibly Chris Smalling if he also continues to play at RB, and also Kyle Walker as he is naturally a full back.
