Baines can look very good sometimes, but can also look very ordinary. Ashley Cole may not be my favourite person, but he's a good player for England. However, I do believe that England should take chances at this WC...the European Cup should be our target. I will be happy if I see England play decent football in Brazil with promise for the future...rather that than just give the same old stale performance with players who probably won't be in the next squads. I think all England fans should take an oath promising not to moan if Roy goes experimental.* * Also known as playing lots of Southampton players
I think this is more down to tactics really. The comment r.e. Baines could be used in regard to Shaw too. In the right attacking formation* where the full backs are expected to be wingers and the DM's take more responsibility in covering defence then Baines and Shaw look great. Put them into a traditional formation or 4-4-2 and they show their shortcomings. * I say 4-2-3-1 is attacking even though it may be seen by others as more defensive. Chelsea, Everton and Saints are playing this at the moment although Mourinho's style seems more a defend and counter while Saints and Everton use it to push their opponent back. Ashley Cole is more suited to the traditional and 4-4-2 where he offers the defensive awareness whilst being able to support the attack when necessary. For Chelsea at the moment it is more a case of their tactics being changed to the full backs being pushed forward. He quite simply isn't the best option in that formation. For England over recent matches he charges forward and struggles to get back. The problem is that for England the tactics seem confused and has been a problem for a long time. Under each manager we seem to be trying to do the Brazil Cafu/Carlos wingback style whilst never having that DM setup to cover it. Barry came in and did well for a while but the Lampard/Gerrard insistence has messed this up for ages. Would be like us insisting that Gaston and Adam play and one of them being in Morgan or Wanyama's place. Doesn't work but England have not been a 'round peg' team for a long time. Many manager's have tried to shoehorn the 'nations faves' into the wrong positions where a German Manager would've put the best player for that position in the team and not tried to make a 'better player' adapt to a different position. So Baines and Shaw and any other full back is going to get found out very often for England unless the tactical formation is in place for them to do what they do well, namely not putting Gerrard or Lampard as the DM. Put a DM in as DM and have Gerrard/Lampard behind the front 3. That for me is why Barry or Carrick should be the first names on the list for England at the moment. Because if one of those (or someone equally skilled at doing the DM position) is not on the pitch then our full backs have to do far more defensive work and pulls them all over the place while 2 AMC/Dynamos are tripping over each other in the middle. My team at the moment would be: ----------------Hart---------------- Clyne----Cahill-----Jagielka---Baines -----------Barry-------------------- -----------------Carrick------------- Lallana--------Gerrard--Welbeck/Ox ---------------Rooney-------------- I wouldn't put Sturridge in the first 11 because he is selfish and doesn't really work that well for the team. Whilst many moan that England are rubbsih and overhyped we have a great first 11. The 11 above is better than the Saints team for sure. Just needs to have the right players in the right positions in the right system and it just might work. maybe. Surely. But let's not keep shoehorning top players ito the wrong positions because it makes the whole team look crap. Lallana
There is no way Gerrard will play there. He doesn't have the legs to play that high up the field anymore.
So...he doesn't play because he is not a DM simples. Now Rooney can play in that #10 position which is what he ends up having to do anyway Still don't want Sturridge up front though.
Gerrard will definitely start. You could easily play Gerrard as one of three central midfielders and play a proper 4-3-3 instead with those players.
Cole has played in six international tournaments, and won everything at club level, including the Champions League within the last two years, and he's only 33 which isn't old for a full-back in relativity. Much like Terry his off the field reputation often draws light away from what a brilliant defender he is. Realistically Cole or Baines won't be 1st choice in any future tournaments, as Gibbs and Shaw will have overtaken them by 2016, so only one of them should go to Brazil. I'd take Cole for the big-game experience. Baines has never played against top European or international sides; Cole's played them all multiple times. Having said that i'd start Baines over Cole against anyone except Brazil, Spain, Germany or Argentina, as he offers more going forward, but if we're to have the slightest chance of going all the way it'd be with Cole at full back.
After reading on saintsweb the expected lineup for the WC i had an idea. FIFA rules dictate that you must take 3 keepers, which we wont need. But if we had to we could put a keeper in an outfield position? So could we announce that "player X had made a radical switch in position and has been selected as our 3rd keeper". They are listed as a keeper but Roy makes a brave move and puts our 3rd choice keeper in an outfield position!
It's not a loophole though. Nobody has ever done it, and if they tried they would be told to go away and pick a proper goalkeeper.
Technically it is. Unless there is a stipulation that the keeper must have played x amount of games at club level, or they state that a keeper cannot play as an outfield player, they're not contravening rules. But it is a silly idea.
Yeah, it has been tried: http://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/jun/03/north-korea-world-cup-goalkeeper-gamble
If I was in a pedantic mood I would say there was a loophole, north Korea tried to use it, Fifa effectively closed the loophole. So if a keeper can't play outfield and the team was hit by a terrible illness/injury crisis they would have to play with 10/forfeit? Do they stipulate that a forward can't play defence? Can a RB play LB? EDIT: just read article the rule states gk cannot play outfield unless injuries. No loophole.
can not see why FIFA make such a fuss, teams should be allowed 23 players and then its up to the manager to decide how many keepers, defenders etc he wants
Pick your squad here, using the departures board: http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/departures-board/
