I have always had my reservations for Holty for England. I am 100% certain he is good enough to play for England, but I also want to see England building for the future, and at the wrong side of thirty Holt doesn't really fit in with that. When people try to justify Grant Holt for England, the most common argument is that he 'is the second highest English goalscorer after Wayne Rooney.' For me this misses the point. For a starter different strikers play different amounts of time (Rooney has probably played more than Holt!) and get different quality of service too. For instance, Rooney has better players behind him than Holt does, so of course he will score more. Not to mention that had we had even a quarter of the penalties we deserved, Holt's goal tally would be higher (I think Rooney has scored double figures of pens!) I'm not trying to make the case that Grant Holt is better than Wayne Rooney of course, but he should be judged on how he plays! Grant Holt is so often referred to as a 'battering ram' or an 'old fashioned centre-forward.' For me this is rude, because there is so much more to his game! Firstly, to state the obvious he is fantastic in the air. That's why he scores headers, wins flick ons and controls long balls forward. He is also very strong and as a consequence very difficult to get off the ball. He works enormously hard for the team of course, I don't think I need to say that. He wins lots of free-kicks (He gives many away too, but usually all free-kicks won/lost are in opposition half so advantage Norwich). He is also able to bury a chance more often than not. Most people appreciate this, but it is often used against him that this is all he does. Yesterday on Canary Call, a fan said that someone should teach Grant Holt to tackle! I think he is actually pretty decent defensively, he certainly helps out more than almost any other forward in the game right now. His defending on set-pieces if particularly valuable, and if you are playing Jermaine Defoe instead of him for instance, you certainly don't get that. People often say that Grant Holt isn't our best striker for one up top, because he can't hold the ball up as well Morrison/Wilbraham. Whilst both of those two are good at that, so is Holt. He controls the ball, uses his strength to hold off the opposition and lays-off to a teammate. How often do we see Wes Hoolahan get tackled, yet Grant Holt is hardly ever tackled. His distribution is also really good; once again, how often do we see Hoolahan/Surman pass a ball straight to the opposition's feet? But Holt never does it! He almost never loses the ball for our team. The more you watch him, the more you realise how good it is. He is capable of as good a cross as Simon Lappin or as good as a chipped through pass as Howson. He has the ability to play these passes and the vision to identify them in the first place, and that's part of why we are so much better with him on the pitch. He is also capable of the exquisite finish, as he has proved vs Wolves/Everton and so on, and most importantly, no matter who he played against, he has always given defenders a hard time. I have no doubt that there is no defender in the world who would be comfortable playing against Grant Holt and that is as good a reason as any that he should be heading to Polkraine. In all honestly Grant Holt doesn't really have any weaknesses. At £400,000 he is one of the best value for money buys in my lifetime. He is simply indispensable for the team and utterly irreplaceable so I'm sure you will all join me in saying: We f'ing love Grant Holt!!!
Watched yesterdays match on ESPN America and both Steve McManaman (ex Liverpool) and Ian Darke (commentator)said that Holt should be given a chance,as they both agreed that he has a brain,unlike most of the other candidates. There opinion was to pick him initially for the friedlies and see how he goes. Seems more people are on the Holt case.
Don't you think you're getting excited because he scored again? To be fair, two of your goals yesterday were a fluke (although you deserved a point on chances and penalty shouts anyway), including Holt's. Would you be posting this today if he hadn't scored with that big looping deflection? He's not in the same class as someone like Rooney. My argument would simply be that there are dozens of strikers down the ages who have scored 10-15 goals and it doesn't qualify you for international football. There's not time to see what kind of striker he'd be at international level (Bent is a great club striker but a hopeless international one, Crouch's international performances eclipse his club ones) so he would be a massive risk to throw in. Referees in the Euros won't allow him to pull players around and fight his way in like English refs do. He has been great for you this season, you played outstandingly well yesterday and that I was JEALOUS of for the first time this season, but Holt is a complete wildcard who could cost us dearly, you must admit.
The first paragraph, I agree his goal was lucky, I said at the time and after the match. But he deserved the chance for a hat-trick from the penalty spot, and I think he had a good game all round. He was excellent all game. The second paragraph is the point of this article; it isn't his goal tally that should earn him a place it is the fact he is a terrific player. And of course he is a wildcard, but I don't see how he could cost us dearly. For the friendlies, there is no Rooney, so it is either Holt or misfiring Sturridge/Welbeck or even God forbid, Andy Carroll. Holt has never let down Norwich, and if he can terrorise Premier League defences, he could cause Pique/Puyol a few problems too!
As I've said before i think him being given would be a good thing for England, BUT as a few of you lot have said before he does always seem to take a while to step up each level so would he have long enough to get up to International level before the Euros Finish. IMHO i would like to see him as one of the over age players at the Olympics as i think he could push the young players on tghe opposition about a bit and do a good job.
I think it could come down to the last day of the season... if Carroll, Holt, Crouch, Welbeck or Sturridge net a couple then they'll be on the plane. I don't think you can look beyond those options at Graham or anyone else now.
Well duh! Nobody is claiming he is, but what can be said is no English striker is in the class of Rooney. Why do people keep comparing Holt to world class players? I remember on 606 someone was claiming he is not in the class of Aguero...we know!! But no Englishman is in the class of Aguero. I don't want Holt to go to the Euros any more, it seems that even if he played well he would be used as a scapegoat if England failed. I rank Norwich above our joke of a national team anyway. Grant Holt has more heart and passion for the game than 90% of our overpaid, prima donna international players. Holt is the best English striker apart from Rooney at the moment. The stats prove it. Goals against, Man United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, Everton and Newcastle, all of which are better than Ukraine.
Well, if two seasons is enough to base that on, but he scored against Chelsea, our third game of the season after all.
I agree but am i wrong to say he took a little time to adjust each step up you'd know better than me as i don't watch him every week, i'm not trying to wind you up just asking.
I remember many people saying Crouch was not good enough to play for England, yet he scores plenty of goals when representing his country Not saying Grant would do the same but he might, unless he gets an opportunity all this talk about whether he is good enough or not is pretty pointless.
In the last two seasons he's been injured pre-season. That effected him slightly but it wasn't anything to do with ability and certainly wouldnt effect him in the euros as he's the fittest he's ever been. And no-one is big enough to injure him.
I'd like to see players from the smaller clubs given the chance if they are performing week in week out it should not just be players that are at the top clubs because a lot of those are just warming the bench.
