You're right - but they're still probably the 5th best team there. The fact that I'm not scared of some of these players makes me scared.
I agree about Henderson, we have plenty of players there. To be honest I don't think either Drinkwater or Townsend would have played even if they had gone. I guess that you might be willing to take a risk with Wilshere and Sturridge as they are talented but I would have taken a wide player instead of Rashford and another defender instead of Henderson.
Scholes decided not to listen to the drivel of Gerrard and Lampard playing together and after being shoved onto the wing he retired. That was more criminal than Carrick not playing DM. Scholes was better than Gerrard and Lampard yet was always pushed out to the left. I agree on Carrick though although I think Barry would have been challenging him. I thought Barry should have been in the England team a long time before he left Villa.
It was obvious to me for years. The difference between watching winning teams, and England, is control of the midfield. Whether you have an enforcer, who reads the game brilliantly (Carrick, Busquets, Pirlo, Alonso etc.), or play a system that wins you the midfield battle (Leicester high energy). England just don't control the midfield, and never have. Our u21's genuinely did it better in the Toulon tournament than the first team.
I wish... What don't you agree with? That the squad hasn't improved? The results certainty have, 100% in qualification and ok in experimental friendlies. Far more exciting to watch. In the past plan A was Gerrard, plan B was lampard. We are tactically more astute. Whilst England have improved other nations have weakened. I am not that naive enough to think we are the best ever but woy is an improvement on Eriksson, Capello and McLaren. I'm quietly confident. Pass me another vodka.
Do you know what - not necessarily. It's to do with players having a defined role, and understanding that role. JWP was great - but he barely did anything. Kept it simple, didn't break forward at all, didn't give the ball away because he was playing 5-yard passes. Putting the team's performance before personal rave reviews. No one really thinks that way for the first team - until Dier and Drinkwater this season.
I think Hodgson should have got the boot after the World Cup. When we come up against well organised/quality opposition in a competitive match then we'll be found wanting. I think the squad of players has talent and that's got the results in qualification inspite of Hodgson, rather than because of.
This is exactly the reason why patience is important in bringing through players as a team. I like Dele Alli a lot and there is no doubt he has earned his place. However, Germany's really successful recent era has been fuelled by developing an U21 team, keeping them together at U21 tournaments and not fast tracking to the first team. Our FA still jump on the 'he scores for a big team, he must be good - get him in the team'. If we are successful this year (and I really hope we are) it will be by playing the Tottenham contingent as the spine of the team. This gives the continuity and the team understanding. Unfortunately it will have very little to do with a grand FA masterplan. Drinkwater should have been included because of a consistently high level of performance in a premier league winning team, in a position where we have limited fully fit options. Townsend has arguably been part of the squad throughout Hodgson's campaigns and is in better form than his direct competition (Sterling). All I can say is that given his contribution in matches, Henderson must be unbelievable in training!
And if only that system worked for England I would advocate it too. But it hasn't. Not since England won the World Cup in 1966. Perhaps it might be an idea to try something a little more innovative.?
