The England Question

[West Kent Saint]

Can people remind me why England are so bad.

Obviously there was effort and some pride that the limited squad can take, and there does seem to be a reality check of sorts that recognises that we are not that good.

But, I'm interested to see what people think needs to be done, or what inhibits the national team. Is it:

overpaid egos

The coaching problem

Pressure

You know, the usual questions put forward.

I realise that most people care more for the Saints (I know I do) but it does intrigue me sometimes, the England question!

 

[TheSecondStain]

Several seasons back, when Saints were almost down and out, we were playing in the Championship, and the football had become absolutely dire at times. I'm talking about the Poortvliet era, of course. Occasionally, we'd string a few passes together, like we knew the kids could, and the crowd would rise a little in volume, only to subside again when the inevitable easy pass went astray. People blamed it on lack of passion, laziness, you name it, it was the problem. I would sit there and think... these poor kids are being asked to bite off more than they can chew. The trouble was, if they were to continue in that fashion it would have possibly irrevocably blotted their careers. It was a good job for all that it ended when it did. They didn't lack passion, they weren't lazy. They simply weren't good enough, at that moment in their careers, and Poortvliet didn't have a magic wand.

In the 2010 World Cup, England were supposed to be better on paper, as is often said, than most of the teams. However, the sum of the parts was awful, when put to the real test. The truth of the matter was that the England parts weren't as good as they were made out to be. They looked good in the PL simply because they had superb players, often of foreign extraction, around them. In this 2012 Euro Cup, similar English players do not appear to be playing to their potential. I would suggest that they are, and the fact is, is that they aren't as good as they are made out to be. And Roy Hodgson has no magic wand. But Hodgson is a good coach, and by being put in a ridiculous position of having a mere few weeks with the players, has been given the excuse that he could do little to improve things in that time. Well, now the proper job starts, and Roy might have to develop that magic wand, in the short-mid term, because unless the PL changes its rules, we shall still see foreign players making some English players look better than they actually are.

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

There is a dirth of real star England players...this can happen in any country. The manager has done well and spirit in the team was high. The real test comes now when Hodgson has more time with the team. Perhaps we also have too high expectations...lots of countries play in tournaments without expecting to win...otherwise there would only be about 6-8 teams who enter. Two stars in the making are from the Saints academy...hopefully improvements being introduced in the academy system and changes to boys football will produce results.

 

[Lff]

I was going to start this very thread this morning. Last night we huffed and puffed and for the first 15 minutes actually looked good but we were eventually, completely outplayed by an average Italian side. The bottom line is that our players aren't good enough.

The blame can be summed up in one word selfishness and greed (ok 2 words!). When the Premier League was first established one of the main reasons given by its proposers was that it would help the English national team. How it was supposed to do this was never established. The facts is that it was only ever about money and power. With the Premier League came Sky and its been a steady decline for England ever since. With the new Sky deal the team finishing last in the league will win as much as Manchester City did winning it last year. Now, this would be a good thing if that money were used to establish top training facilities and academies to develop English youngsters (and dare I say it, reduce admission prices to a reasonable level - thats a debate for another thread!). But it won't. For the most part that money will simply line the pockets of the already rich, and mostly foreign, players.

In this tournament our players have looked average at best despite some heroic last ditch performances from the likes of Terry. Gerrard looked reasonable although not as good as the reports. Rooney has been woeful and would surely not have been selected if he wasn't 'Rooney'. Imagine the flack Hodgson would have received if we'd lost and he hadn't picked him. The only player who really looked half good was Johnson who has a lot of technical ability.

Essentially, as SecondStain points out, there just aren't enough English players playing regularly in the English Premier League. The top clubs are getting richer (albeit, more in debt!), the players are getting richer and clubs are allowed to play sometimes with no English players at all. The new rules won't help much either. They relate to 'squad', not 'team'. So the actual team on the pitch will still be dominated by overseas players who will continue to flock here for the money.

It could be sorted out at a stroke of course with rules about how many home produced players must be on the pitch at one time. I would also ban any negations with self seeking agents who only want money for their players and themselves. But it won't happen. Too many of our clubs are now have foreign owners too (oops, sorry but true) with no interest in England. I don't see how that can be reversed.

In the short term then we are probably doomed! Not helped by the fact that our coaching structure makes it very hard for anyone not having played the game to break through thereby repeating all the same old mistakes. The FA have to be strong but they have shown year in year out that they are not.

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

You can't expect club owners and managers to care about National sides (regardless of their own nationality)...their priority is their own clubs because that is what they are judged on. They always report with pride when one of their players is called up by a National side, but surely they must prefer that they aren't. The Saints team have had a full summer break and will be back for preseason relaxed and ready to go. Bet Nigel's pleased about that.

 

[samoholic]

I was going to start this very thread this morning. Last night we huffed and puffed and for the first 15 minutes actually looked good but we were eventually, completely outplayed by an average Italian side. The bottom line is that our players aren't good enough.

The blame can be summed up in one word selfishness and greed (ok 2 words!). When the Premier League was first established one of the main reasons given by its proposers was that it would help the English national team. How it was supposed to do this was never established. The facts is that it was only ever about money and power. With the Premier League came Sky and its been a steady decline for England ever since. With the new Sky deal the team finishing last in the league will win as much as Manchester City did winning it last year. Now, this would be a good thing if that money were used to establish top training facilities and academies to develop English youngsters (and dare I say it, reduce admission prices to a reasonable level - thats a debate for another thread!). But it won't. For the most part that money will simply line the pockets of the already rich, and mostly foreign, players.

In this tournament our players have looked average at best despite some heroic last ditch performances from the likes of Terry. Gerrard looked reasonable although not as good as the reports. Rooney has been woeful and would surely not have been selected if he wasn't 'Rooney'. Imagine the flack Hodgson would have received if we'd lost and he hadn't picked him. The only player who really looked half good was Johnson who has a lot of technical ability.

Essentially, as SecondStain points out, there just aren't enough English players playing regularly in the English Premier League. The top clubs are getting richer (albeit, more in debt!), the players are getting richer and clubs are allowed to play sometimes with no English players at all. The new rules won't help much either. They relate to 'squad', not 'team'. So the actual team on the pitch will still be dominated by overseas players who will continue to flock here for the money.

It could be sorted out at a stroke of course with rules about how many home produced players must be on the pitch at one time. I would also ban any negations with self seeking agents who only want money for their players and themselves. But it won't happen. Too many of our clubs are now have foreign owners too (oops, sorry but true) with no interest in England. I don't see how that can be reversed.

In the short term then we are probably doomed! Not helped by the fact that our coaching structure makes it very hard for anyone not having played the game to break through thereby repeating all the same old mistakes. The FA have to be strong but they have shown year in year out that they are not.

Agree with your points but still, a professional football player should be able to pass the ball successfully to a team mate.

Defensively, I think we are sound. Nothing wrong with Hart and our back four is about as good as it gets in international terms.

Ashley Young gets picked by reputation and the fact he plays for Man Utd. He is a one-trick pony who has actually been out of form since November last year when played on the wing. Scott Parker is a massively over-rated clogger, a sideways pass merchant who gets picked because he'll put his face where people are afraid of putting their boots. Fair play for that, it'll get you far but international football requires more than just heart. Gerrard was decent, poor last night but overall did well. Milner, bless him, tries hard but does nothing.

Can't fault Welbeck, fed off scraps the whole tournament, willing runner but thats about all you can say.

The less said about Rooney the better. He is so over-rated it hurts.

 

[fatletiss]

Great thread, all the the title I would call "The English Disease". You'll all get fed up with me going on about "The English Disease".

It is funny that a week ago, I was reading about how England could do it, how well we were playing, how good our defense was, how well Roy had done with what he had. The truth is simple: we have fallen behind in how we develop our young players. I don't mean our young professionals, I mean our 6,7 and 8 year olds. We teach children to win matches; that is not how to play football. Turn up at any public pitch in September and stand and watch 3 or 4 games and I promise you there will be coaches yelling at the boys to get the ball forward. There will be two sets of parents suddenly turning the volume and high pitch screaming up when the ball gets over the half way line, which will in turn make the boys play a little more panicy or a little more rushed.

Saturday morning my Under 11's team played a friendly. The other team had a huge defender, almost my height; he took all free-kicks and all goal kicks. When he got the ball in free play he kicked it at least 30-40 yards every time over our defense and each time his coach shouted "good kick". "good kick"??? For goodness sake, what dos good kick mean. That young man may become the next John Terry because he is big and strong and stands out a mile from the other boys, but not because of his technical footballing ability, and if he goes all the way like John Terry, he'll come up against a technically better Italian, Brazilian, German or Spaniard that will out play him. Heavens, he may come up against a technically better Algerian who will out play him (as evidenced by the 2010 World Cup when Algeria did out play England). In this same game, one of my technically better players, recieved the ball on the edge of the centre circle (on a smaller 9 v 9 pitch) and he tried to shoot. Now I know that boys' parents pay him extra pocket money if he scores a goal and double if he gets a hat-trick. What do you think that is teaching him? I tell him to get his head up and look to see what his options are and to think about the best decision; he thinks "sod that, I'll have a fiver". Now the boy had the shot and it obviously rolled through to the goal keeper as he was too far out, but unfortunately once or twice a season he scores like that and everyone goes wild and he is encouraged to shoot from there more often.

The problem lies with us, the parents, the coaches, the fans and the players. We demand that we get the ball forward quickly. We demand this every week in the Premier League and this encourages us to expect the game to be played quickly. The truth is the game needs to be played skillfully and to do this you need the ball and then when you have the ball you need to keep it.

It is not simply about technique; we have some technically very good players. It us about mind-set and tactical knowledge. On Saturday night, my wife muttered the following words, "Spain make it so easy for themselves as they move into a position where they can get a pass" wow! How profound. I watched the Spain v France game and loved it. The Spanish only tried to dribble passed a player three or four times; the rest of the game they just passed it simply, BEFORE a defender came to them. It isn't difficult, it is a simple game.

The FA are trying to change the culture of youth football and move away from a "win first" attitude, but we are at least ten years (probably 20) from this taking effect. Personally I don't think they'll succeed, because we are British and our attitudes are ingrained in us. I am not a do-gooder, who is ant-competitive - far from it. If you knew me, I am Mr competitive, however, enough is enough. We should not even discuss winning with kids football. Kids play football, becasue they naturally love to run around outside and do something with their mates. Let's coach them properly when they are young. Let's be brave and stand up to the coaches and parents who only worry about winning; let's change things. Let's hope that we can produce tactically, physcologically, technically gifted footballers in the next five to ten years.

My last point is this: please allow the FA to hold a press conference and say that the 2014 World Cup qualifiers, the 2016 Euros and the 2018 World Cup are not important to us. We don't care if we qualify or not; we hope we do, but our focus will be to develop a core of young, talented, free minded players ho can play this wonderful modern game, that once was ours.

Let's take it back, but understand that will take time.

 

[Che’s Godlike Thighs]

Our time will come. 5 years, 10, 15, who knows. It simply has to.

 

[Schad]

England can field a squad that is comfortably in the second tier of world football. It cannot field a squad better than that, because the players aren't there. Contrary to what some others have said, I don't think that it's heart or hustle or teamwork that lets them down, it's the simple fact that England has, over the past couple decades, produced a good many excellent footballers...but not nearly as many who can call themselves truly elite. This is particularly true when it comes to creative attacking types, as England has frequently featured a slew of talented but flawed players going forward, and suffered for it.

International football is, by and large, about being lucky enough to have a group of tremendous players develop at the same time who happen to fill different roles; Portugal, for instance, has suffered because they can produce everything apparently but a striker, Argentina has struggled to find the midfield general to drive them to elite status (or the defending to back them up), and France cannot find players who can go more than two weeks before resorting to training ground fisticuffs. England, meanwhile, has produced a lot of good defensive players, some very good holding midfielders, but few of late who can dictate play from the centre, nor anyone to dominate the flanks.

If, say, Jack Wilshire, Alex Chamberlain and another attacking mid or winger reach their potential, and another good striker emerges to play alongside Rooney, suddenly there's nothing wrong with England's talent development, tactics or stick-to-it-iveness. And so it goes.

 

[samoholic]

England can field a squad that is comfortably in the second tier of world football. It cannot field a squad better than that, because the players aren't there. Contrary to what some others have said, I don't think that it's heart or hustle or teamwork that lets them down, it's the simple fact that England has, over the past couple decades, produced a good many excellent footballers...but not nearly as many who can call themselves truly elite. This is particularly true when it comes to creative attacking types, as England has frequently featured a slew of talented but flawed players going forward, and suffered for it.

International football is, by and large, about being lucky enough to have a group of tremendous players develop at the same time who happen to fill different roles; Portugal, for instance, has suffered because they can produce everything apparently but a striker, Argentina has struggled to find the midfield general to drive them to elite status (or the defending to back them up), and France cannot find players who can go more than two weeks before resorting to training ground fisticuffs. England, meanwhile, has produced a lot of good defensive players, some very good holding midfielders, but few of late who can dictate play from the centre, nor anyone to dominate the flanks.

If, say, Jack Wilshire, Alex Chamberlain and another attacking mid or winger reach their potential, and another good striker emerges to play alongside Rooney, suddenly there's nothing wrong with England's talent development, tactics or stick-to-it-iveness. And so it goes.

On what evidence does this clown deserve to retain his place? He is awful. He contributes nothing. He might be alright for Man Utd but he has not justified his selection in an England shirt since 2004.

 

[Saint Possum]

I feel we need to forget what's happened now and before and take on a bright new young Manager,
Pep Guardiola should be first choice
And let him work with a younger looking English squad.
I think these players could make the Core of the team.


Hart
Walker
Cahill
Jones
Oxolade-Chamberlain
Wiltshire
Welbeck

 

[Schad]

On what evidence does this clown deserve to retain his place? He is awful. He contributes nothing. He might be alright for Man Utd but he has not justified his selection in an England shirt since 2004.

On the basis of being one of the more talented players England can muster; while has hasn't been particularly good in international play, he might look better if he had assistance going forward. If not, yeah, boot him to the curb. But I do struggle to look at the gulf between his club and country forms and think that the difference is the jersey, rather than the ability of his teammates at Man U to put him in positions where he can succeed.

Edit: put another way, I think that Rooney can be a valuable piece for England. He certainly cannot be England, though.

 

[fatletiss]

Our time will come. 5 years, 10, 15, who knows. It simply has to.

if we don't change our grass roots football, it simply won't.

 

[Lff]

Great thread, all the the title I would call "The English Disease". You'll all get fed up with me going on about "The English Disease".

It is funny that a week ago, I was reading about how England could do it, how well we were playing, how good our defense was, how well Roy had done with what he had. The truth is simple: we have fallen behind in how we develop our young players. I don't mean our young professionals, I mean our 6,7 and 8 year olds. We teach children to win matches; that is not how to play football. Turn up at any public pitch in September and stand and watch 3 or 4 games and I promise you there will be coaches yelling at the boys to get the ball forward. There will be two sets of parents suddenly turning the volume and high pitch screaming up when the ball gets over the half way line, which will in turn make the boys play a little more panicy or a little more rushed.

Saturday morning my Under 11's team played a friendly. The other team had a huge defender, almost my height; he took all free-kicks and all goal kicks. When he got the ball in free play he kicked it at least 30-40 yards every time over our defense and each time his coach shouted "good kick". "good kick"??? For goodness sake, what dos good kick mean. That young man may become the next John Terry because he is big and strong and stands out a mile from the other boys, but not because of his technical footballing ability, and if he goes all the way like John Terry, he'll come up against a technically better Italian, Brazilian, German or Spaniard that will out play him. Heavens, he may come up against a technically better Algerian who will out play him (as evidenced by the 2010 World Cup when Algeria did out play England). In this same game, one of my technically better players, recieved the ball on the edge of the centre circle (on a smaller 9 v 9 pitch) and he tried to shoot. Now I know that boys' parents pay him extra pocket money if he scores a goal and double if he gets a hat-trick. What do you think that is teaching him? I tell him to get his head up and look to see what his options are and to think about the best decision; he thinks "sod that, I'll have a fiver". Now the boy had the shot and it obviously rolled through to the goal keeper as he was too far out, but unfortunately once or twice a season he scores like that and everyone goes wild and he is encouraged to shoot from there more often.

The problem lies with us, the parents, the coaches, the fans and the players. We demand that we get the ball forward quickly. We demand this every week in the Premier League and this encourages us to expect the game to be played quickly. The truth is the game needs to be played skillfully and to do this you need the ball and then when you have the ball you need to keep it.

It is not simply about technique; we have some technically very good players. It us about mind-set and tactical knowledge. On Saturday night, my wife muttered the following words, "Spain make it so easy for themselves as they move into a position where they can get a pass" wow! How profound. I watched the Spain v France game and loved it. The Spanish only tried to dribble passed a player three or four times; the rest of the game they just passed it simply, BEFORE a defender came to them. It isn't difficult, it is a simple game.

The FA are trying to change the culture of youth football and move away from a "win first" attitude, but we are at least ten years (probably 20) from this taking effect. Personally I don't think they'll succeed, because we are British and our attitudes are ingrained in us. I am not a do-gooder, who is ant-competitive - far from it. If you knew me, I am Mr competitive, however, enough is enough. We should not even discuss winning with kids football. Kids play football, becasue they naturally love to run around outside and do something with their mates. Let's coach them properly when they are young. Let's be brave and stand up to the coaches and parents who only worry about winning; let's change things. Let's hope that we can produce tactically, physcologically, technically gifted footballers in the next five to ten years.

My last point is this: please allow the FA to hold a press conference and say that the 2014 World Cup qualifiers, the 2016 Euros and the 2018 World Cup are not important to us. We don't care if we qualify or not; we hope we do, but our focus will be to develop a core of young, talented, free minded players ho can play this wonderful modern game, that once was ours.

Let's take it back, but understand that will take time.

Superb analysis. As someone who has taken the FA coaching badge (lowest level) I can tell you that our coaching in this country is poor. It is extremely hard for any non-professional player to get that badge because it is something of a closed shop. As such the same old habits get taught to the next generation. It is slowly changing as ideas in fitness training for example are now considered important. But as Fatletiss says, at kids level, coaching is generally non-existent. Having said that I am not criticising those people who give up their time to run kids's teams. Its the lack of any structure behind what they do that make s it an impossible task.

 

[Missing Lambo]

Great thread, all the the title I would call "The English Disease". You'll all get fed up with me going on about "The English Disease".

It is funny that a week ago, I was reading about how England could do it, how well we were playing, how good our defense was, how well Roy had done with what he had. The truth is simple: we have fallen behind in how we develop our young players. I don't mean our young professionals, I mean our 6,7 and 8 year olds. We teach children to win matches; that is not how to play football. Turn up at any public pitch in September and stand and watch 3 or 4 games and I promise you there will be coaches yelling at the boys to get the ball forward. There will be two sets of parents suddenly turning the volume and high pitch screaming up when the ball gets over the half way line, which will in turn make the boys play a little more panicy or a little more rushed.

Saturday morning my Under 11's team played a friendly. The other team had a huge defender, almost my height; he took all free-kicks and all goal kicks. When he got the ball in free play he kicked it at least 30-40 yards every time over our defense and each time his coach shouted "good kick". "good kick"??? For goodness sake, what dos good kick mean. That young man may become the next John Terry because he is big and strong and stands out a mile from the other boys, but not because of his technical footballing ability, and if he goes all the way like John Terry, he'll come up against a technically better Italian, Brazilian, German or Spaniard that will out play him. Heavens, he may come up against a technically better Algerian who will out play him (as evidenced by the 2010 World Cup when Algeria did out play England). In this same game, one of my technically better players, recieved the ball on the edge of the centre circle (on a smaller 9 v 9 pitch) and he tried to shoot. Now I know that boys' parents pay him extra pocket money if he scores a goal and double if he gets a hat-trick. What do you think that is teaching him? I tell him to get his head up and look to see what his options are and to think about the best decision; he thinks "sod that, I'll have a fiver". Now the boy had the shot and it obviously rolled through to the goal keeper as he was too far out, but unfortunately once or twice a season he scores like that and everyone goes wild and he is encouraged to shoot from there more often.

The problem lies with us, the parents, the coaches, the fans and the players. We demand that we get the ball forward quickly. We demand this every week in the Premier League and this encourages us to expect the game to be played quickly. The truth is the game needs to be played skillfully and to do this you need the ball and then when you have the ball you need to keep it.

It is not simply about technique; we have some technically very good players. It us about mind-set and tactical knowledge. On Saturday night, my wife muttered the following words, "Spain make it so easy for themselves as they move into a position where they can get a pass" wow! How profound. I watched the Spain v France game and loved it. The Spanish only tried to dribble passed a player three or four times; the rest of the game they just passed it simply, BEFORE a defender came to them. It isn't difficult, it is a simple game.

The FA are trying to change the culture of youth football and move away from a "win first" attitude, but we are at least ten years (probably 20) from this taking effect. Personally I don't think they'll succeed, because we are British and our attitudes are ingrained in us. I am not a do-gooder, who is ant-competitive - far from it. If you knew me, I am Mr competitive, however, enough is enough. We should not even discuss winning with kids football. Kids play football, becasue they naturally love to run around outside and do something with their mates. Let's coach them properly when they are young. Let's be brave and stand up to the coaches and parents who only worry about winning; let's change things. Let's hope that we can produce tactically, physcologically, technically gifted footballers in the next five to ten years.

My last point is this: please allow the FA to hold a press conference and say that the 2014 World Cup qualifiers, the 2016 Euros and the 2018 World Cup are not important to us. We don't care if we qualify or not; we hope we do, but our focus will be to develop a core of young, talented, free minded players ho can play this wonderful modern game, that once was ours.

Let's take it back, but understand that will take time.

This is a superb post. My dad was a handy footballer who came down from Scotland during the 20's looking for work. He played the game at a semi-pro level down here too. He loved to tell the story of how, receiving the ball from a throw in, he had little option but to hoof it into the opponent's penalty area. He was shocked that fellow players and supporters called out to him "Great ball, Jock".

Last season there were those came onto this board to complain about sideways passing from Saints. The fact that we kept the ball, thus denying possession to our opponents was lost, just as Lambert's superb movement was criticised by the "Why-is-Rickie-on-the-wing" brigade. Until we all get used to the idea that keeping possession is the first requirement and stop demanding that we get "the bloody thing forward" then we will always be technically inept.

 

[Missing Lambo]

Superb analysis. As someone who has taken the FA coaching badge (lowest level) I can tell you that our coaching in this country is poor. It is extremely hard for any non-professional player to get that badge because it is something of a closed shop. As such the same old habits get taught to the next generation. It is slowly changing as ideas in fitness training for example are now considered important. But as Fatletiss says, at kids level, coaching is generally non-existent. Having said that I am not criticising those people who give up their time to run kids's teams. Its the lack of any structure behind what they do that make s it an impossible task.

Spot on. When I did run kids teams I found I was patronised by the ex-pros who were also "coaches". They didn't coach, just packed their teams with the best kids in the area (because they could as they had reputations as players) and let 'em loose. I once suggested to a coach who ran a team that regularly ran up 20+-0 scorelines that once his team was, say, 7 or 8 ahead he might give some of his lesser players a chance. He looked at me as if I had just suggested that he removed his manhood with a rusty blade! He also told me in no uncertain terms that the kids on the end of a 30-0 drubbing were "learning something" (?!)

 

[Wisescummer]

Two things are the problem. Firstly, there are more UEFA qualified youth coaches in Bilbao than in the whole of the UK. So it's little wonder that the whole of our squad combined has less technical ability than one of Andrea Pirlo's little toes. Secondly, is the deeply ingrained English attitude to how football should be played. Its been mentioned before, but we do not like to see teams play possession football or with flair. For instance I remember a game against Hartlepool a few seasons back. They had had a man sent off and we were 1-0 up through the resulting penalty. Saints were passing the ball well, playing what I thought was great pass and move possession football, making Hartlepool run about chasing shadows and generally getting knackered and frustrated in the heat. In short, we were doing what is exactly the right thing. However, all around me in the crowd whenever we strung five passes together in the middle third, fans were getting up and shouting, 'DO SOMETHING WITH IT!!!' or 'THIS IS RUBBISH'. I'm guessing what they wanted was for us to just hump it long or to attempt a 1 in 100 defence splitting hollywood pass. In England games in this tournament, I have seen England players affected by a similar attitude. They pass it around five times in the middle third, look comfortable, and then suddenly one player (usually Lescott) would decide to just hump it or play a hollywood pass, resulting in possession being lost and (Against Italy), us not seeing the ball for the next five minutes.

 

[fatletiss]

Two things are the problem. Firstly, there are more UEFA qualified youth coaches in Bilbao than in the whole of the UK. So it's little wonder that the whole of our squad combined has less technical ability than one of Andrea Pirlo's little toes. Secondly, is the deeply ingrained English attitude to how football should be played. Its been mentioned before, but we do not like to see teams play possession football or with flair. For instance I remember a game against Hartlepool a few seasons back. They had had a man sent off and we were 1-0 up through the resulting penalty. Saints were passing the ball well, playing what I thought was great pass and move possession football, making Hartlepool run about chasing shadows and generally getting knackered and frustrated in the heat. In short, we were doing what is exactly the right thing. However, all around me in the crowd whenever we strung five passes together in the middle third, fans were getting up and shouting, 'DO SOMETHING WITH IT!!!' or 'THIS IS RUBBISH'. I'm guessing what they wanted was for us to just hump it long or to attempt a 1 in 100 defence splitting hollywood pass. In England games in this tournament, I have seen England players affected by a similar attitude. They pass it around five times in the middle third, look comfortable, and then suddenly one player (usually Lescott) would decide to just hump it or play a hollywood pass, resulting in possession being lost and (Against Italy), us not seeing the ball for the next five minutes.

exactly.

 

[Che’s Godlike Thighs]

if we don't change our grass roots football, it simply won't.

That's a valid argument, but no one can deny that we have been the victims of the most atrocious luck regarding all the penalty shoot-outs, plus the Seaman howler against Brazil. If just one of them had gone the other way, it could have been so different. Also, I think the FA has to shoulder most of the blame for their consistently awful selection of managers since Hoddle.

 

[Wisescummer]

A PENALTY SHOOTOUT HAS **** ALL TO DO WITH LUCK!!! I'm sorry but this luck thing is a myth propagated by British pundits. The Germans would never say something like this. It's about technique under pressure. If it was about luck then England would have won more than one shootout, and Germany would have lost more than one. Last night did Ashley Cole miss because he was unlucky? No, he missed because he took a **** penalty that my gran could have saved (and she's been dead four years).