England - The Road to 2012 (now featuring Wayne Rooney) but not his touch

[Leppard]

The 4-2-3-1 as I see it refers to one guy playing in the hole, while the system that United employ usually has Rooney dropping deep from the position of a striker to the hole. When someone says 4-2-3-1, I think more of the formation we played at Everton, where Cahill played behind the striker and then went forward to support said striker. It's not much of a difference, tbh.

[Icelander83]

The 4-2-3-1 as I see it refers to one guy playing in the hole, while the system that United employ usually has Rooney dropping deep from the position of a striker to the hole. When someone says 4-2-3-1, I think more of the formation we played at Everton, where Cahill played behind the striker and then went forward to support said striker. It's not much of a difference, tbh.

Only difference being where he starts from, then? As he'd probably end up with the same heatmap in either definition.

[shanyi]

Would be a good start if someone could teach them to make sensible passing choices with the ball, and press the opposition a little without it.

[SCIAG]

Spain aren't inherently boring,

Oh they are, stylistically at least. Watching that week in week out is horrible, you need a couple of geniuses like Iniesta and Silva/Messi or you get as frustrated as watching a team who give the ball away too readily. Maybe one day England will have players who are comparable with Iniesta (Chamberlain maybe), but until then I'd rather we kept everyone behind the ball. Though we do have a load of other options available between the two extremes and should go for one of them if possible.

Having said that, I agree with your last sentence. I don't really care how England play, as long as the results are good.

[Philip Rolfe]

Shame there's not a lot of footage of the last couple of England U16 teams on YouTube; whilst it's obviously a lower standard you look for and find certain things in their play which promise a fair deal, particularly in a few players. Might try and upload bits and pieces, everyone's clamouring for reforms which have already taken place and are starting to produce quality, it just takes time to come through.

[Leppard]

Could someone tell me what exactly did the Germans do to overhaul their youth setup a decade or so ago?

[Zvonimir Boban]

Gave passports to every immigrant with a kid who could trap a football.

[PMLF]

Tim Vickery on England's elimination:

England deserved to be eliminated. England became New Zealand. New Zealand were eliminated unbeaten in the 2010 World Cup playing with two lines of four and with passion. England need to aspire more than that.

I don'y like Tim Vickery, but he is better commenting English football than Brazilian one.

[robbert_o154]

Gave passports to every immigrant with a kid who could trap a football.

Not this boring **** again.

[ddidiodion]

You mean give a passport to every immigrant with a kid who was going to have a kid who could trap a football? Fair play.

[SCIAG]

I, for one, will be voting for whoever promises to give British passports to all South Americans.

[Zvonimir Boban]

You mean give a passport to every immigrant with a kid who was going to have a kid who could trap a football? Fair play.

Have to applaud them on their foresight

[PMLF]

I, for one, will be voting for whoever promises to give British passports to all South Americans.

You do know that while the best South American players are certainly better than the best English ones many of them are a bunch of chokers. Brazil and Argentina were only marginally better than England in recent World Cups. And while Uruguay reached the semis, they still ultimately lost all the same.

I think you guys should naturalize Spanish and German players.

[joe__the__man]

We tried that...Manuel Almunia.

[Pukey]

Give Arteta an England cap

[PMLF]

What are you guys going to do regarding this thread?

Open a new one, 'Road to Brazil' or something?

EDIT: Or maybe just rename this thread and move it back to the football forum.

[scott MUFC]

just change the title to, now not featuring England

[PMLF]

England to be in 4th place in FIFA's ranking: http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/england-are-now-up-to-fourth-in-fifas-941416

Brazil, on the other hand, will apparently drop outside the top 10, to 11th place, the worst position ever.

[Guv'nor]

And for all the 4-2-3-1s, who makes the team tick? Chelsea: Drogba, Mata, Liverpool: Gerrard, Leiva, Suarez; City: Silva, Arsenal: Song, Arteta...Man United side and perhaps Stevie G at Liverpool, which team has English players playing as more than passengers? That is why, when they come together, minus the Davis David Silva's and Van Persie's, they look pathetic.

[jmr]

For the people saying "England don't have the players", what do you even mean? I feel this is such a meaningless sentence that the people saying it haven't even thought about it. Are you saying these players aren't capable of passing the ball, can't keep possession for more than 30% of a game, not capable of taking it to a team that are equal or worse than us so have to sit on the edge of our own box with two banks of four, that we are so weak at fullback positions that we have to play an out of place more defensive minded person on the right wing? These are players that are european champions, have won the league multiple times, have been called world class on more than one occasion, play regularly at some of the biggest clubs in the world, but somehow they aren't capable of passing and keeping the ball? How does that make sense?

The way the team setup was horrible, I don't care about 442 or 4231 etc etc, it doesn't matter when trying to keep the ball. We setup in a way that LET the other teams, worse teams than ourselves have 70% of the possession in every single game. How do you think Gerrard and Parker felt chasing the ball 70% of the time, for 3 games in a week and a bit? They were ****ing knackered and you could see it in the Italy game, after 20-30 minutes we were done because those two players were done. What do you think would have happened vs Germany if we fluked a win against Italy? I dread to think. You cannot let the opposition have the ball that much in tournament play because you are going to burn yourselves out chasing it, it's insane that we persisted with this tactic once Lampard and Barry got injured as it meant we had no quality replacements for Gerrad and Parker.

Personally I think Hodgson is a mess of a manager and his tactics are from the dinosaur age, they might work in a one off or where you have a week to prepare a game, but in tournament play where you can play upto 6 times in 2.5 weeks it just doesn't. There was no way we were winning this tournament playing this way. Even though I don't like the man Redknapp wouldn't have settled for this terrible brand of football, we wouldn't have won it with him incharge either but we would have had a better chance with him not afraid to attack and taking it to the opposition. I mean were we really just relying on luck, that the opposition would miss 10 chances per game, which is what happened? No ones saying we should start playing tiki-taka football and dominate teams like Spain do, but there has to be a middle ground between that and what we are currently doing.

I honestly can't stomach another minute of watching England play the way they played this tournament, I can't imagine the players get much joy out of it, I bet some will be dreading the callup now they know what awful football we are going to try and play from here on out until Roy is gone. Is this really the man we want leading England for the next 4 years, let alone the job he will do after that in trying to bring through youngsters? I can just imagine in 20 years time we'll have a team full of James Milners, ****ing hell.

[Razzler]

Shame there's not a lot of footage of the last couple of England U16 teams on YouTube; whilst it's obviously a lower standard you look for and find certain things in their play which promise a fair deal, particularly in a few players. Might try and upload bits and pieces, everyone's clamouring for reforms which have already taken place and are starting to produce quality, it just takes time to come through.

Our performances in different age groups definitely seems to be improving so that's great but the problem is, as we all know, it doesn't matter how good they are at 15, 16, 17 or 18 because they are unlikely to be given sufficient games to develop. Part of the development and playing at the top level is you're not going to do everything right, right away but I think 10-15 games, proper games at the top level is invaluable to players but are they going to get a chance to play?

Unless you're the next Rooney at 16 or 17 then you're considered not good enough all because some Brazilian full back or midfielder is in the team that the club paid money for too so will overlook the ropey performances as he cost 10m whereas the young lad making the same mistakes doesn't maybe get the same patience. Players develop at different ages and to do that they have to play.

Look at McEachran. Is he ever going to play or is he going to sign for Watford and everyone say 'shame about him, he looked the part but didn't progress' without being given the actual chance to progress and how many other players get the same treatment?

We can do all like with the Youth side of things and even with the new Burton thingy but it all stops when we get to the top level of football unless players are given a chance and there is more patience but there's a lot at stake for clubs in all games.

[aggressive minor]

Important point by Razzler, the awfull low percentage of English players in the Premiership is horrific really.

[SeanNUFC]

I'm sure we have this exact same discussion every time England go out. This is the least i've ever cared for it/us going out, strange feeling.

[Astafjevs]

For the people saying "England don't have the players", what do you even mean? I feel this is such a meaningless sentence that the people saying it haven't even thought about it. Are you saying these players aren't capable of passing the ball, can't keep possession for more than 30% of a game, not capable of taking it to a team that are equal or worse than us so have to sit on the edge of our own box with two banks of four, that we are so weak at fullback positions that we have to play an out of place more defensive minded person on the right wing? These are players that are european champions, have won the league multiple times, have been called world class on more than one occasion, play regularly at some of the biggest clubs in the world, but somehow they aren't capable of passing and keeping the ball? How does that make sense?

I've thought about it. Keeping the ball isn't just about having a 1,0000% pass accuracy, although it helps.

Receiving it in, and not losing it in, tight areas. Movement off the ball so that there is more than one short passing option. That sort of thing. And some of the midfield players aren't as adept at it, or are weaker at it than, the good teams in Europe.

I think looking at x player and saying 'he's won xx trophies playing for y big club' is the wrong way to look at it, for two reasons. First is the obvious that y big club usually has a healthy number of oversease players that can perform the above well, and so aid the English players immensely.

The second is that how many of these clubs play a possession game? And please don't say that these teams have majority possession every week - they will do because they're usually playing much weaker opposition for 29-30/38 games a season. How many actually play a possession game that you see in Europe or international football? Not many.

[Razzler]

Important point by Razzler, the awfull low percentage of English players in the Premiership is horrific really.

Everyone can see this clear as a bell but what do we do?

I am sure I read something about UEFA/Platini wanting to change that thing were clubs in the UK can sign 16 year olds as pro whereas in Europe they can't (or something) and I agree with that actually. No movement until 18, screw bringing in the best talent from all over France and Spain maybe they'll be more focus on home grown youth if you couldn't bring players in until 18 and they'd also be a higher fee involved so would make clubs think twice as it is.

It's a start. Premier League was supposed to benefit the National side so if there's something that is decided that is for the best then let's implement it then instead of going cap in hand to the Premier clubs asking if it's ok to do this or that

[Dan_rm]

Ah, the formations chat again. I can't get my head around why people think "4-2-3-1 with Rooney in the hole" is any different to "4-4-2 with Rooney running around like a mental for 20 minutes before he's shattered".

I'm pretty sure I've posted it on here before, but it's still relevant. For me Xabi Alonso was the first top class midfielder of this generation to play in the Premiership, and the one thing he said was most important was to pause. It doesn't necessarily have to be about having possession, it's about control. I like Scott Parker, but running around throwing yourself in front of shots all game shouldn't be part of the plan at that level.

The thing that always strikes me watching England is how the players seem to be unaware of their surroundings, and always seem to be the team chasing the game, no matter what the score is. I found it embarrassing during the last hour or so of the Italy game. Pirlo was getting tired, yet was still getting the ball more then anyone else, just by walking around a space of 15 yards.

I reckon Oxlade-Chamberlain and Walcott are the two players that could be a bit different, but they're hampered by their managers/teams. I don't know what Ox's preferred position is, but I think he has the attributes to be a quality center midfielder (I've only seen him play in that game against Milan, and he was good). The thing I like about Walcott is his movement. I don't get why all England managers (and I guess Wenger) have stuck him on the wing, where he's pretty limited. I can remember a few games this season where he momentarily played in the middle and a good run meant the was clean through. Yes, his finishing is pretty abysmal most of the time, but that can improve. Going back, I think he played up front for England U21s and Southampton as well?

I don't really watch the England youth teams, so I would be interested to hear from Philip Rolfe or anyone else about their different qualities.

Anyway, I've just reread that and it's pretty messy, I didn't really know how to link a few different thoughts together, but oh well. As for the near future, I can't wait to see Wilshire gradually be moulded into Gareth Barry, and other such wastes of talent.

[Philip Rolfe]

Our performances in different age groups definitely seems to be improving so that's great but the problem is, as we all know, it doesn't matter how good they are at 15, 16, 17 or 18 because they are unlikely to be given sufficient games to develop. Part of the development and playing at the top level is you're not going to do everything right, right away but I think 10-15 games, proper games at the top level is invaluable to players but are they going to get a chance to play?

Unless you're the next Rooney at 16 or 17 then you're considered not good enough all because some Brazilian full back or midfielder is in the team that the club paid money for too so will overlook the ropey performances as he cost 10m whereas the young lad making the same mistakes doesn't maybe get the same patience. Players develop at different ages and to do that they have to play.

Look at McEachran. Is he ever going to play or is he going to sign for Watford and everyone say 'shame about him, he looked the part but didn't progress' without being given the actual chance to progress and how many other players get the same treatment?

We can do all like with the Youth side of things and even with the new Burton thingy but it all stops when we get to the top level of football unless players are given a chance and there is more patience but there's a lot at stake for clubs in all games.

Oh definitely, the only reason I mentioned it is that some people are still banging on about reform when it's actually already underway, that was the only reason I mentioned the younger age groups.

[Razzler]

We can see the difference in performances now, getting to semis and finals isn't so unbelievable at other age levels except senior It's just a shame that this good work will probably only go 'so far'. I think that's there for all to see when they talk about 'English players are rubbish' as they're clearly not and we're still producing players and even producing a different type of player, as you say so the groundwork is there and perhaps this Burton thing can increase this even more.

I am not sure what the U16 and U17 are like now but I think in age group football the philosophy of a 'good big guy' can still be effective to an extent. You can use physicality to gain an advantage and I notice in U21, where we've done ok in a couple of tournaments, that we still looked the biggest and strongest and not the most fluid. I think at 16 and 17 it's a little tricky to trade on physical process cause they're still kids but U21s obviously you get some big guys.

Is this just at youth national level, what about watching the Chelsea and Uniteds of the world at that age also, as I know you and a few others do? Are they also more into a passing game at club level? Obviously you can't always go with a physical presence at that age so somewhere between there and 20/21 years old the wheels are coming off.

What's the point of a Youth team or even national youth side that plays a certain type of game only to be forced to play completely different at club or national senior level? At least the Dutch have that kind of thing sorted and with England and our selection of flavour of the time highly paid managers any sense of identity has been lost.

I guess this is another in the list of 1,000,000 things Burton is supposed to solve

[Lermon]

England to be in 4th place in FIFA's ranking: http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/england-are-now-up-to-fourth-in-fifas-941416

Brazil, on the other hand, will apparently drop outside the top 10, to 11th place, the worst position ever.

England 4th Awful rankings.

[Fe98]

I, for one, will be voting for whoever promises to give British passports to all South Africans.

Fixed.

oops. wrong sport.

[skybluedave]

4th I don't quite understand this. I know we don't lose that often but neither do most big nations.

It's not like it's done on opinion, there is a system in pace which calculates the results. It's the same for every nation. So how are we 4th?

[Philip Rolfe]

4th I don't quite understand this. I know we don't lose that often but neither do most big nations.

It's not like it's done on opinion, there is a system in pace which calculates the results. It's the same for every nation. So how are we 4th?

This explains enough about it: http://www.football-rankings.info/2012/06/fifa-ranking-july-2012-probable-ranking_20.html

[scott MUFC]

i bet it is because we beat spain in a friendly lol

[Razzler]

If that's what it is then that's what is. It's not like a bunch of guys sat around and said 'who you think is the best' which is what happens on here. No one pays attention anyway but we still go through this every time the rankings are out.

They are used to decide seeds and such though so useful to be 'high' for that

[Astafjevs]

And that's why everyone goes through this every time they come out. To use something that's so obviously wrong to seed teams is a joke.

[Razzler]

For qualifications groups there's usually 8 or 9 groups and England are comfortably in that.

Groups end up rubbish cause of the 8th or 9th best top seed along with the 8th or 9th best 2nd seed and then suddenly you have an awful group. Top seeds didnt matter much for this tournament either as Ukraine and Poland were two of them so better off not being a top seed.

These have their criteria and I don't think there are too many 'what, they're a top seed in this' moments. As soon as some CONCACAF tournament comes along and the Yanks win it they'll be 4th best in the world, Brazil will slide with no competitive games, no doubt.

Meh

[SCIAG]

You do know that while the best South American players are certainly better than the best English ones many of them are a bunch of chokers. Brazil and Argentina were only marginally better than England in recent World Cups. And while Uruguay reached the semis, they still ultimately lost all the same.

I think you guys should naturalize Spanish and German players.

We tried that...Manuel Almunia.

And Lewis Holtby.

South Americans are happy to abandon their country of birth whereas Spaniards and Germans aren't. Besides, we already have freedom of movement in the EU.

[PMLF]

For qualifications groups there's usually 8 or 9 groups and England are comfortably in that.

Groups end up rubbish cause of the 8th or 9th best top seed along with the 8th or 9th best 2nd seed and then suddenly you have an awful group. Top seeds didnt matter much for this tournament either as Ukraine and Poland were two of them so better off not being a top seed.

These have their criteria and I don't think there are too many 'what, they're a top seed in this' moments. As soon as some CONCACAF tournament comes along and the Yanks win it they'll be 4th best in the world, Brazil will slide with no competitive games, no doubt.

Meh

Brazil are also dropping as Brazil rarely beat big teams nowadays, last time Brazil beat big teams in a consistent way was before the 2010 WC. Since then only beat Argentina once and lost or tied all other games vs big teams.

And Lewis Holtby.

South Americans are happy to abandon their country of birth whereas Spaniards and Germans aren't. Besides, we already have freedom of movement in the EU.

The only reason why South Americans do it more often is because there are a lot more South Americans playing abroad, while there are very few Spaniards and Germans. If there were more, you'd see more of them playing for other national teams.

[Guv'nor]

Ah, the formations chat again. I can't get my head around why people think "4-2-3-1 with Rooney in the hole" is any different to "4-4-2 with Rooney running around like a mental for 20 minutes before he's shattered".

My sentiments exact. 4-2-3-1 is just a glorified 4-4-2 for England. As for the arguments in favour of this formation, quoting a plethora of United players, a Scotty Parker, Walcott etc, look beyond the names. Yes, United dominate the EPL, largely because they have the better players, City aside. What happened to their almost all English, glorified 4-4-2 in Europe? This was the eye opener, we didnt take heed to the warning. The rigidity was exposed by everyone, Basel Fawlty, Benfica, Bilbao. They were disgraced! Arsenal's 4-2-3-1, exposed by AC Milan. Of the champions Chelsea, they were more 8-1-1 than anything else.

...The recall of Paul Scholes from retirement to dictate the tempo shows, just how pivotal possession is to such a formation. We couldn't keep the ball even if we had all eleven players dress up as a scrotum, so why play a formation that demands it?