Euro 2012.

Cleat Eastwood

DonDaddyD wrote:

Where as the generations I'm talking are a team of great players.

thats the point though, as ranieri said when abramovich bought him a great side - he said its fine having a squad having of world class players - but can you call them a team. Big flop for the dutch was willems, i thought they were just outclassed and gave in to their usual trait of collapsing into infighting once they go behind. shame i like the dutch ever since their great 1978 world cup escapades.

asprilla

DonDaddyD wrote:

daviesee wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I don't think it is. I'm talking about argaubly the third greatest generation of Dutch players (Gullit era being the first and best followed by DeBoer and Overmars' generation).

So where does the Johan Cruyff era come in all this :?: :?

Wasn't Cruyff one really great player. In a international team of decent - good players. Where as the generations I'm talking are a team of great players.

Cruyff was one really great player, but he was surrounded by a team of great players too.

daviesee

DonDaddyD wrote:

Wasn't Cruyff one really great player. In a international team of decent - good players. Where as the generations I'm talking are a team of great players.

Pah!
You young 'uns know nowt.

It would have been like Messi dropping into the Guillit era. Their problem just happened to be that the German team was even more effective. Note effective, not better. But that's another debate......

ToeKnee

After Wayne Rooney's goal last night he tested positive for a performance enhancing rug. Courtesy of Radio 2.

iclestu

iclestu wrote:

iclestu wrote:

got a bet on Denmark at 100-1 to win it (seemed worth a punt for a quid - if Greece can do it ... ) before they won their first match so they are my adopted team. Will be watching them with interest later!

pah! They were robbed. That was a clear penalty

Hoping to regain my losses with Czech republic tonight. 5-1 seems a huge price?

rick_chasey

Czechs look up for it. More so than Portugal so far.

cornerblock

Ronaldo, Nani and Pepe all in the same side. Come on the Czech Republic!

cjcp

Asprilla wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

daviesee wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I don't think it is. I'm talking about argaubly the third greatest generation of Dutch players (Gullit era being the first and best followed by DeBoer and Overmars' generation).

So where does the Johan Cruyff era come in all this :?: :?

Wasn't Cruyff one really great player. In a international team of decent - good players. Where as the generations I'm talking are a team of great players.

Cruyff was one really great player, but he was surrounded by a team of great players too.

This.

iclestu

iclestu wrote:

iclestu wrote:

iclestu wrote:

got a bet on Denmark at 100-1 to win it (seemed worth a punt for a quid - if Greece can do it ... ) before they won their first match so they are my adopted team. Will be watching them with interest later!

pah! They were robbed. That was a clear penalty

Hoping to regain my losses with Czech republic tonight. 5-1 seems a huge price?

at this rate im gonna have to put a fortune on Italy to try and win back my money :twisted:

rick_chasey

C'mon people, no comment about the football?

It was a good, proper, English quarter final performance. Took me back to the good old days, y'know, when they were mildly more likeable.

optimisticbiker

Rick Chasey wrote:

C'mon people, no comment about the football?

It was a good, proper, English quarter final performance. Took me back to the good old days, y'know, when they were mildly more likeable.

Veni, vidi, caudam inter tibias domum :roll:

rubertoe

Rick Chasey wrote:

It was a good, proper, English quarter final performance.

You're right Rick.

It was shoot.

UndercoverElephant

I must say that had England won it on penelties, the Italians would have had every right to feel mugged. First half, England looked pretty good, second half they looked awful. Germany would have killed them in the Semis.

cyclingprop

Rick Chasey wrote:

C'mon people, no comment about the football?

It was a good, proper, English quarter final performance. Took me back to the good old days, y'know, when they were mildly more likeable.

So I looked on Facebook on Sunday night and was surprised to learn more people weren't watching Rihanna on bbc3.

daviesee

The quicker Roy accepts that England played better as a team without Rooney the better for them.

Maybe a snub or two would bring him down to earth and ultimately help.

iclestu

daviesee wrote:

The quicker Roy accepts that England played better as a team without Rooney the better for them.

Maybe a snub or two would bring him down to earth and ultimately help.

+1

He wasn't effective at all for them, was he? Ego's sometimes need boosting and, just sometimes, need bruising. Its determining when thats the difficult bit. That's the art of management I guess. You may well be right though

cjcp

iclestu wrote:

daviesee wrote:

The quicker Roy accepts that England played better as a team without Rooney the better for them.

Maybe a snub or two would bring him down to earth and ultimately help.

+1

He wasn't effective at all for them, was he? Ego's sometimes need boosting and, just sometimes, need bruising. Its determining when thats the difficult bit. That's the art of management I guess. You may well be right though

To be fair, though, the problem isn't just with one player (Rooney). It's about an inability to keep the ball by players in a variety of positions. I can't play football for toffee, but look at the players in England's 1990 team compared to the current crop: Waddle, Barnes, Gazza, Bearsdley. Four players who were very comfortable on the ball. The ball needs to be held up there, not just by a front player to nod down for a faster striker to run on to.

daviesee

cjcp wrote:

To be fair, though, the problem isn't just with one player (Rooney). It's about an inability to keep the ball by players in a variety of positions. I can't play football for toffee, but look at the players in England's 1990 team compared to the current crop: Waddle, Barnes, Gazza, Bearsdley. Four players who were very comfortable on the ball. The ball needs to be held up there, not just by a front player to nod down for a faster striker to run on to.

+1
It is a national problem starting young though.
Watch kids playing football in your area. Then go on holiday and watch the local kids playing football.
I have seen 8 year old Spanish kids on the beach with more ball control than half the EPL players :shock:

rick_chasey

Kick and run is as English as fish and chips.

It's always been played like that in the UK.

There's a reason no English players play outside of the EPL - no continental team wants them.

English players are more than capable of keeping the ball. You can see it in their club football.

It's when you have 10 players defending very deeply - it's difficult to get the ball out and keep hold of it - since you usually have a good 8 or 9 players behind you all on top of one another - so you inevitably go for the long ball or punt up.

Anyway, I find the spanish style is overrated.

rick_chasey

The English are a quarter final team - for as long as I can remember, they have been.

Get through the group stages, go out against the first 'big' team.

They haven't beaten a big team in a proper competition for over a decade.

daviesee

Rick Chasey wrote:

1. Kick and run is as English as fish and chips.

2. It's always been played like that in the UK.

3. There's a reason no English players play outside of the EPL - no continental team wants them.

4. English players are more than capable of keeping the ball. You can see it in their club football.

5. It's when you have 10 players defending very deeply - it's difficult to get the ball out and keep hold of it - since you usually have a good 8 or 9 players behind you all on top of one another - so you inevitably go for the long ball or punt up.

6. Anyway, I find the spanish style is overrated.

I agree fully with most of you points above with the exception of:-
4. Some can to a certain extent at club level, most can't. The players in the EPL with the best ball control are not English (and certainly not Scottish).
6. That's down to personal taste on tactics but you can't deny that they control the ball better.

rick_chasey

daviesee wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

1. Kick and run is as English as fish and chips.

2. It's always been played like that in the UK.

3. There's a reason no English players play outside of the EPL - no continental team wants them.

4. English players are more than capable of keeping the ball. You can see it in their club football.

5. It's when you have 10 players defending very deeply - it's difficult to get the ball out and keep hold of it - since you usually have a good 8 or 9 players behind you all on top of one another - so you inevitably go for the long ball or punt up.

6. Anyway, I find the spanish style is overrated.

I agree fully with most of you points above with the exception of:-
4. Some can to a certain extent at club level, most can't. The players in the EPL with the best ball control are not English (and certainly not Scottish).
6. That's down to personal taste on tactics but you can't deny that they control the ball better.

For sure, but they're the best players in the world.

Take the Dutch. They usually want to play a short passing game. Doesn't always end well.

I find the German style of play more flexible and more effective.

daviesee

Rick Chasey wrote:

For sure, but they're the best players in the world.

Take the Dutch. They usually want to play a short passing game. Doesn't always end well.

I find the German style of play more flexible and more effective.

We are back to tactics again.
My point was that British players simply do not possess the basic skills required to play the game at a high level.

rick_chasey

daviesee wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

For sure, but they're the best players in the world.

Take the Dutch. They usually want to play a short passing game. Doesn't always end well.

I find the German style of play more flexible and more effective.

We are back to tactics again.
My point was that British players simply do not possess the basic skills required to play the game at a high level.

Ah they do.

I don't buy this "English players have a poor touch". They just don't at club level. Rooney has an excellent touch. Ashley Young has a pretty good touch - as does Welbeck (who's pass completion rate is up there with the highest in the Euros this tournament). Gerrad's touch is also good. You're right that it is SO basic that in order to be considered a good fotballer anywhere, even in England, you need to have it.

You don't get into the starting 11 in Champions league quarters, semis, and finals having a bad touch. You just don't.

Nor is it the case that someone like Rooney isn't a key player in those teams.

If people want passers, why wasn't there more outcry that Carrick wasn't selected?

cjcp

Rick Chasey wrote:

daviesee wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

For sure, but they're the best players in the world.

Take the Dutch. They usually want to play a short passing game. Doesn't always end well.

I find the German style of play more flexible and more effective.

We are back to tactics again.
My point was that British players simply do not possess the basic skills required to play the game at a high level.

Ah they do.

I don't buy this "English players have a poor touch". They just don't at club level. Rooney has an excellent touch. Ashley Young has a pretty good touch - as does Welbeck (who's pass completion rate is up there with the highest in the Euros this tournament). Gerrad's touch is also good. You're right that it is SO basic that in order to be considered a good fotballer anywhere, even in England, you need to have it.

You don't get into the starting 11 in Champions league quarters, semis, and finals having a bad touch. You just don't.

Nor is it the case that someone like Rooney isn't a key player in those teams.

If people want passers, why wasn't there more outcry that Carrick wasn't selected?

But club/EPL level isn't the same as Champions League or international level. I've got a great touch when I play against kids, but the touch of an elephant when playing against someone better than me.

They're put under different pressure; there's less time at a higher level to dwell on the ball. Lampard's a classic example of somebody who was barnstorming at club level, but found it difficult to retain/pass the ball to the same level when it reached the latter stages of the CL or international level.

gabriel959

Spain's passing game isn't what makes it, really. It is the stifling pressure they create when they lose the ball. It is so difficult to keep the ball away from them, if you are not used to playing without the ball then your team will suffer.

Unfortunately for Torres he doesn't fit Spain's way of playing but David Villa do, that is why Spain has been less effective these championships as he isn't around and we really haven't got a substitute in the squad right now.

In any case, England's problem has always been at grassroots level, their passing just isn't good enough for some of them. Look at the defensive midfielders like Scott Parker or players like James Milner, they offer massive amounts of work-rate and really good ball retrieving skills but when it comes to passing the ball they aren't good enough.

My guess is that people like Ramos or Pique, both spanish defenders, are better passers than all english midfielders bar Gerard.

rick_chasey

You think international level is higher than the champions league?...

That's where we differ.

The best teams are teams who play most of their season together anyway. Germany's made up of mostly Bayern players with the odd Dortmund player.

Spanish are mainly Barca with the odd Real chap (and they've only come good in the last 4 years. They were exactly the same as England for years and years before then).

The French have good touches, good passing, good skills. They do badly too. Similar to England. Their players are about as diverse re-clubs are the English are.

Italy, for all their hype, only had two good players and couldn't score against England for 2hrs. Also, the league where most of them play is a lot more homogenous re playing style which helps too.

daviesee

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ah they do.

......decides to disagree and leave it at that........

Ben6899

Rick Chasey wrote:

Nor is it the case that someone like Rooney isn't a key player in those teams.

If people want passers, why wasn't there more outcry that Carrick wasn't selected?

Rooney was hindered massively by England's approach in the QF against Italy. The defensive style and lack of service led to him dropping deeper to link play and also contributing to the midfield shenanigans i.e. being given the run around by Pirlo and - to a lesser extent - de Rossi. Combine that with a lack of match fitness and he was knackered.

Gerrard has been England's best player, this tournament, but he was wank on Sunday evening. Found out of his depth by that man Pirlo. No shame at all in that.

Carrick is an interesting conundrum. When Barry was injured and ruled out, I put something on Facebook along the lines that it made Hodgson do something brave by possibly giving a starting berth to Young, Oxlade-Chamberlain or Walcott. A friend of mine who supports City commented along the lines: "don't be daft, Barry is a Premiership champion, with good pass-completion, who played 95% of his club's matches this season".

To which I replied: "So basically, just like Carrick for much of the noughties, but there's no way you would defend his selection for England!" Nobody rates the lad, but his credentials are undeniable.

Scapegoating Rooney (not at his excellent best), Cole (missing the penalty) or Young (missing the penalty and showing inexperience against a wonderful Italy) for Sunday's exit - as some corners of football support are doing - is short-sighted, embarrassing and completely missing the point.

I recall a certain midfielder being made a pariah in 1998. The same knuckle-dragging heathens who burned effigies back then, worship the very ground he walks on nowadays. Fickle b@stards.

cjcp

Rick Chasey wrote:

You think international level is higher than the champions league?...

That's where we differ.

The best teams are teams who play most of their season together anyway. Germany's made up of mostly Bayern players with the odd Dortmund player.

Spanish are mainly Barca with the odd Real chap (and they've only come good in the last 4 years. They were exactly the same as England for years and years before then).

The French have good touches, good passing, good skills. They do badly too. Similar to England. Their players are about as diverse re-clubs are the English are.

Italy, for all their hype, only had two good players and couldn't score against England for 2hrs. Also, the league where most of them play is a lot more homogenous re playing style which helps too.

How many English *players* play at the higher levels of the Champions League? Not enough.