Allow me to retort. If Woy had used his noggin he'd have realised the heat in Brazil usually means playing possession football is key. Players who can keep the ball and use it well. Two names at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Huddlestone and Cleverley. I know Cleverley didn't get picked in the end but f**k me how many times did Woy need to see him play to realise he was kak? He never experimented with players who deserved a chance and yes I do mean Davies and Huddlestone. He continuously picked players on which club they played for. He looks like an owl and can't pwonounce his own name and to top it off he looks like Party's mate Carol. f**k off Woy. Just f**k off.
i remember commenting on the england v italy match about how pirlo was pretty much walking around the pitch, barely a sweat and a puff to find on his bearded hairy skin huddlestone should have had a chance but hey ho
Just hope he's not a jock. He's be off his tits on smack and Buckfast. Plus he might have a heart attack mid air due to all the deep fried pizza the ginger **** wolfed down with a gallon of Irn Bru to wash it down.
I don't think there has been so many stereotypes thrown into one post. Beautiful stuff. Trainspotting is a documentary, isn't it Brady?
I don't blame Hodgson for the performances on the pitch but I do worry that he doesn't have the courage to really mix things up for friendlies/qualifiers to give others a shot, and I'm not sure he has the charisma to inspire the players in an environment like this. Deschamps has done wonders for France, we could use someone like him (but English) to revitalise things.
The heat/possession football thing turned out to be just another cliche. We didn't lose games because we were tired, chasing the ball about or not holding onto it enough. Our possession and passing stats were good. The problem was the ability to unlock a defence, and for most of the season Huddlestone had the very same problem with us. I agreed with his decision not to take Huddlestone, although I do think he should maybe have been considered earlier in the season, and Carrick/Cleverley should have been behind Barry at least rather than being named on the standby list. Davies should have gone in my opinion, but presumably his age went against him. I know we like to moan but surely no one genuinely believes he picks players based on who they play for? Any **** could do that. There has to be a better reason than that for Davies not going. Peter Taylor spoke at an OSC event just before the squad was picked and said he wouldn't take Davies as he's too limited on the ball. I don't necessarily agree with that but it shows there are reasons for not rating players and I'm 100% sure it isn't based on who they play for.
The disappointing thing about Pirlo is, he dominated our midfield at the last tournament - we learnt nothing from that.
I dont agree with the problem with a defender being limited on the ball. Jack Charlton was limited on the ball but he could defend. The important thing about defenders is the ability to defend - ie not leave Suarez in space and not let Suarez and Balotelli have space for a free header. You have to be touching the player not give them a yard or more start. Pirlo only had space against England not Costa Rica.
In regards to my point about the players having no experience playing abroad, the 'experts' on 5 live last night all had a very similar word to say. I hadn't noticed until I heard it, but very little of the squad has any real experience of playing outside of the premier league. Some have a handful of Europa league games and the odd international game but nothing concrete and they thought that was a big factor. And they've got a point, when you look around at the other heavyweight nations, they're made up mostly of players who have at least had decent experience of the Europa league/champions league if they're not currently playing in those competitions with their clubs. Who do we have with that experience? Hart, Cahill, Gerrard, Rooney and Welbeck. Not enough really is it...
In the Daily Mail today, the Martin Samuel column, he makes relatively frequent reference to Steve Bruce in his assessment of where the sweet FA should go in terms of the England managers job. He's the first name Samuel offers as an English option, then 3 times comments on his achievements with Hull City and the FA cup final, citing him as a great motivator. He appeals for a manager who can exceed expectations and not just meet them as Bruce, Pulis and Dyche did last season. It goes short of suggesting Bruce is the man for the job but it's interesting to read a well established sports writer (like him or not) use Bruce as an apparent benchmark for over achievement and player motivation.
Roy isn't going anywhere but should be sacked because he is evidentially not good enough to do the job. I've never liked Roy from the beginning. I think he is tactically inept at this level and it doesn't help that he is a total wally and charisma vacuum. The whole not enough English player in the premier league and players been too young to some extent is a load of bull **** and a scape goat for the fact that Roy has failed miserably and countries with far smaller population, pool of players and far worse infrastructure are performing at a far greater level than us. We instead of bringing someone in capable of doing the job keep Roy and back him like we have had some sort of moral victory. The truth is we have a great squad that is definitely capable of winning the tournament. Yes there are far greater teams and players out there but our squad has the potential to win it if we had the right tactical mastermind at the helm. This is based on things like Greece winning the Euros or Chelsea winning the Champions league. There is no prize for playing 'well' and we on two occasions were tactically out done and Roy had no clue whatsoever on how to approach the game and how to change things when it went wrong. The formation we used clearly didn't work. He stayed with the same team a one formation twice and in both occasions it didn't work. There were glaringly obvious problems with glaringly obvious solutions that Roy failed to notice or do anything about. He didn't play his best team and he didn't play people in their right positions. The amount of options he had on the bench and he failed to utilise them. Didn't use players like Llanna, Barkley, Milner and lambert to his advantage. Stuck with the Same technique time after time or get it down the wing and put in a cross. And just his overall inability to change things when they were going wrong. I feel with someone like Murinho in charge we would have performed so much better but instead we make excuses like nothing is wrong and pretend Roy has done a good job. Truth is that he Roy is inept.
I sort of agree with you there CMPUNK but why doesn't anyone seem to expect more of the players? It's like they need a type of manager to motivate them, which I don't understand. Yes the manager sets the team up, deals with tactics etc, but ultimately its the players that are on the pitch, and ours always seem to need motivating to make an effort. Pulling that shirt on should be all the motivating they need but it's never enough for the majority of ours. If we had 11 players with the mentality of say Beckham, we'd do a lot better.
