International Adaptability - A New Stat

[Chinook2000]

If you have separate stats for a Player when he is picked for an International side then you are effectively creating two players the one your watching for his Club will be different to the one you pick to play internationally. Thankfully the very small Poll is disagreeing with the OP as an unnecessary addition.

The Miroslav Klose example made me laugh as his good club stats lead to him being picked for his Country. If he has better International Stats it's due to playing regularly Versus teams like Andorra and San Marino.

What do you want a Player with poor Club attributes so he will not get picked for his country meaning he will not have an International stat? How do you rate his International ability if he doesn't play Internationally ?

[ManagerFootball]

If you have separate stats for a Player when he is picked for an International side then you are effectively creating two players the one your watching for his Club will be different to the one you pick to play internationally. Thankfully the very small Poll is disagreeing with the OP as an unnecessary addition.

The Miroslav Klose example made me laugh as his good club stats lead to him being picked for his Country. If he has better International Stats it's due to playing regularly Versus teams like Andorra and San Marino.

What do you want a Player with poor Club attributes so he will not get picked for his country meaning he will not have an International stat? How do you rate his International ability if he doesn't play Internationally ?

The Wayne Rooney you see for Man Utd is a different Wayne Rooney to what we see for England. How would you implement this clear difference? What has Rooney done for england since 2004. Historically he is a different player for England. Same for most English players.

I am just as much up for hearing other solutions, but the status-quo is not working. The International Module suffers and suffers.

[louissiscool]

If you think England are as great in real life as they are in this game then I am amused. Rooney is great at scoring against san marino, he doesnt score hat tricks against brazil though like he does in some of my games. Gerrard is awesome against a Poland or a Norway, where is he in the massive games for England? He is always there for the massive games for Liverpool though. Funny aint it. Lampard and Gerrard are notorious for not being able to play well together, in FM not a problem its a world class partnership. I could probably go through all of the england team but i think you should get the point by now.

If you are refering to one of my previous comments when i said england where great on paper then how is this laughable? i watch the premierhsip every week being a football fan i can tell you now rooney is a good player he might not knock in 25 goals a season but he works his arse off for the team and does normally get around 116 or so in the league every year which is still respectable for someone you would not call an out an out striker.

As for your ideas about saying how good players individual stats will be based on there countries culture and national morale this is stupid because in real life a country could call someone up for the first time and they are phenominal and exactly what they needed, look at the current crop of belgium players with your system that could never happen.

[ManagerFootball]

So how do we overcome these issues. Thats the whole point of this thread. Someone suggested how successful you were at club level could have an effect on how players perform for you on the International scene. Would that be a better path to explore?

[Fosse]

I think you seem desperate for your ideas to be incorporated into the game, hence changing your points every other post - whilst players do perform differently for their national sides it's not because of their 'adaptability' but down to internal and external factors, the internal factors being the player himself, his personality and how they handle pressure of playing at a big tournament. The external factors are playing with different players to their club sides, a different manager and maybe a different system. You could probably shoehorn all of this into an international adaptability stat but as others have already said, it's too flawed.

Using Klose as an example didn't help your point considering his goalscoring record is decent.

[ManagerFootball]

Using Klose as an example didn't help your point considering his goalscoring record is decent.

Decent for CLUB, terrific for NATIONAL TEAM.

lol please, the ego card? lol. If you look at my previous post you can see I am leaning towards Eugenes idea instead. Are you saying its wrong for people to change ideas/solutions when possible flaws are mentioned? thats quite dangerous thinking.

[samdiatmh]

The fake players usually have god like stats

pretty sure that the "fake" players are just real ones with different names

I can go through the german team and find the Neuer, Hummels, Schweinsteiger and others

although that may be due it used to being there in my save (my DC got 50 caps) and then got removed somehow (so he's now always "devastated at being left out of national squad")

[Chinook2000]

The Wayne Rooney you see for Man Utd is a different Wayne Rooney to what we see for England. How would you implement this clear difference? What has Rooney done for england since 2004. Historically he is a different player for England. Same for most English players.

I am just as much up for hearing other solutions, but the status-quo is not working. The International Module suffers and suffers.

Wayne Rooney is Wayne Rooney for Man United and England just because he reacts differently to different tactics and Managers doesn't make him 2 people. Would you have a separate Wayne Rooney if he'd gone to Arsenal and failed?

Wayne Rooney is also a bad example as he has 43 goals from 99 games which is a good rate and so bad that he keeps getting picked.

[jumbohotdog]

pretty sure that the "fake" players are just real ones with different names

I can go through the german team and find the Neuer, Hummels, Schweinsteiger and others

although that may be due it used to being there in my save (my DC got 50 caps) and then got removed somehow (so he's now always "devastated at being left out of national squad")[/quote

The real players play they just do not get called up right?

[brawla123]

The who national teams part of the game needs redevelopment so this new stat wouldn't make a difference in my opinion. There should be a better way to process the game as a national team manager instead of going on holiday every week or going to matches every week to see who to call-up. It's boring.

[Matshit]

It seems like your real issue is the England team performing better in game than in real life.

This is mostly because SI is English, and English people always overrate English players.

To semiquote Guardiola from a few years back, there is 20 young midfielders in Spain who are at least as good as Wilshere. In England he was still looked at as the second coming of Christ.

The Rooney example doesn’t work. First of all, his England stat is pretty decent. Second of all, the reason he can perform better for United is that he has better players around him, and doesn’t need to be the heart, brain and everything else of the team. Plus, he really isn’t that great.

Another example could be Diego Costa, who has been great for Atletico and Chelsea. Terrible for Spain. The most logical reason there is that Atletico and Chelseas football suits him better.

You can find lots of similar examples. Plus some players like Klose and Inzaghi is really suited for the big matches for some reason.

What needs to be done about England is two things. First, the youth academy quality needs to be turned down. England is one of the best nations when it comes to the overall quality of regens, and they soon get a load of world stars. Second of all, the quality of the youths already in the game needs to be turned down. The hype around the English teenagers is absurd, and they rarely ever perform as good as expected. If the researchers could stop believing in the hype, the national team wouldn’t suddenly become much better.

[forameuss]

It seems like your real issue is the England team performing better in game than in real life.

This is mostly because SI is English, and English people always overrate English players.

To semiquote Guardiola from a few years back, there is 20 young midfielders in Spain who are at least as good as Wilshere. In England he was still looked at as the second coming of Christ.

The Rooney example doesn’t work. First of all, his England stat is pretty decent. Second of all, the reason he can perform better for United is that he has better players around him, and doesn’t need to be the heart, brain and everything else of the team. Plus, he really isn’t that great.

Another example could be Diego Costa, who has been great for Atletico and Chelsea. Terrible for Spain. The most logical reason there is that Atletico and Chelseas football suits him better.

You can find lots of similar examples. Plus some players like Klose and Inzaghi is really suited for the big matches for some reason.

What needs to be done about England is two things. First, the youth academy quality needs to be turned down. England is one of the best nations when it comes to the overall quality of regens, and they soon get a load of world stars. Second of all, the quality of the youths already in the game needs to be turned down. The hype around the English teenagers is absurd, and they rarely ever perform as good as expected. If the researchers could stop believing in the hype, the national team wouldn’t suddenly become much better.

Well to be honest, I think the relative success of England in FM compared to real life is more down to how England could play given no external factors, which are absent in FM. They are slightly over-rated, perhaps through natural bias, but in FM there's none of the pressure that comes with being involved in the team, it's just one set of stats and tactics up against another. If football was really like that, you'd probably see England constantly hit quarter finals, maybe even a few semis.

And again, your youth academy point is similar. Without the added pressure and all that rubbish, British (not just English players) would probably start reaching their potential more. Scotland got to the final of the 2006 European U19 Champs, where they were narrowly beaten by Spain 2-1. Of the side that played in the final, only Graham Dorrans is playing at a "big" club and he was on the bench. Lee Wallace of Rangers started, and Scott Fox of Partick Thistle was on the bench. Of the rest of the starting eleven, only one is in a top division, the rest either in the Scottish Championship, League One (in Scotland and England) or in Non-League football. The Spain side...well, they had Pique, Mata, Mario Suarez, Javi Garcia, Granero, Jeffren...

England also made it to the final of the 2009 Under 21 European Championships where they were pummeled by Germany 4-0. The names were far better known there, but there are also names like Scott Loach, Martin Cranie and Michael Mancienne who haven't really done anything compared to some of their opposition, who named...*clears throat*...Neuer, Hummels, Ozil, Khedira and Boateng. Sure England had Walcott, Milner and Gibbs, but five years after the event, the German's are World Champions and England are still in a pit of self-loathing.

But what's the point of this? Well it's not that Britain doesn't produce talent, particularly England. They do. And in great amounts. It's the handling of said talent that leaves much to be desired. The little psychological factors that the game don't factor in contribute in the real world to mean that years after almost achieving great success, these talented players either stagnate or just disappear. That hasn't happened for Spain or Germany, or probably a lot of the other big European nations. For me, that's the real life problem in football in this country, but it's one of education and motivation among young footballers.

But my core point would be that none of this really matters to me - I'm happy for FM to be about the best up against the best. I'm always reluctant to add things into a game that you absolutely can't change. The OP says that the values will be dynamic, but even if they're built to be dynamic, they won't be. Low values for a nation that determine how their players play will mean these nations will always be low. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, like the seedings for qualifying but more hidden. And while these values are low, any newgens will have low values...and on we go, the big nations win, again and again. How boring.

[BoxToBox]

It seems like your real issue is the England team performing better in game than in real life.

This is mostly because SI is English, and English people always overrate English players.

To semiquote Guardiola from a few years back, there is 20 young midfielders in Spain who are at least as good as Wilshere. In England he was still looked at as the second coming of Christ.

The Rooney example doesn’t work. First of all, his England stat is pretty decent. Second of all, the reason he can perform better for United is that he has better players around him, and doesn’t need to be the heart, brain and everything else of the team. Plus, he really isn’t that great.

Another example could be Diego Costa, who has been great for Atletico and Chelsea. Terrible for Spain. The most logical reason there is that Atletico and Chelseas football suits him better.

You can find lots of similar examples. Plus some players like Klose and Inzaghi is really suited for the big matches for some reason.

What needs to be done about England is two things. First, the youth academy quality needs to be turned down. England is one of the best nations when it comes to the overall quality of regens, and they soon get a load of world stars. Second of all, the quality of the youths already in the game needs to be turned down. The hype around the English teenagers is absurd, and they rarely ever perform as good as expected. If the researchers could stop believing in the hype, the national team wouldn’t suddenly become much better.

To be fair, it's not just England, you could pick up 11 Argentine u-21's last year, and in season or two, you'd have a beast of a team.

[Matshit]

I think it is a big mistake to compare who has the best youth systems by who wins most matches at youth level.

There is a lot of nations who have had great youth national team without succeeding on the highest level.

Developing good talents is about more then getting the best results on youth levels, and my impression of the English system is that a lot of coaches focus more on winning matches and winning competitions than actually developing players.

There is pressure in England yes, but I think it comes more down to the fact that a lot of young players are superstars before even playing for the senior team.

I have seen English youth squads signing autographs like they are some sort of superstars.

There is also a huge focus on giving the young players the best luxurious facilities they can get. A young player in a big Premiership side don’t even have to wipe himself.

It seems really unlogical to believe that players becomes better by everything around him being fantastic. A lot more players have been world class by playing barefoot on the street of Brazil, then by a English academy setup.

[forameuss]

I think it is a big mistake to compare who has the best youth systems by who wins most matches at youth level.

There is a lot of nations who have had great youth national team without succeeding on the highest level.

Developing good talents is about more then getting the best results on youth levels, and my impression of the English system is that a lot of coaches focus more on winning matches and winning competitions than actually developing players.

There is pressure in England yes, but I think it comes more down to the fact that a lot of young players are superstars before even playing for the senior team.

I have seen English youth squads signing autographs like they are some sort of superstars.

There is also a huge focus on giving the young players the best luxurious facilities they can get. A young player in a big Premiership side don’t even have to wipe himself.

It seems really unlogical to believe that players becomes better by everything around him being fantastic. A lot more players have been world class by playing barefoot on the street of Brazil, then by a English academy setup.

Yeah, you're right. I wasn't saying that if you win at youth level, then you're a shoe-in to do the same at senior, but for two of the home nations to reach European finals, and then - particularly Scotland I have to say - to have most of these players slip right down the ladder is worrying. It could be a lot of things, but the "superstar" point is a good one. Pressure and adoration are heaped on the players. The latter turns them into thinking they're the badger's knadgers, and inadvertently heaps more and more pressure on them. Because if there's one thing the media loves more than a good passionate English boy doing well for their country, it's said English boy acting like, well, a young, stupid boy.

The quality of facilities is also an interesting point. I've always thought the way they deal with kids in this country is disingenuous. They can boast of the state-of-the-art facilities, but like you say, a boy in Brazil with nothing but a ball and a space could end up with more personal accolades. Kids should be allowed to just go and enjoy their football, rather than being thrown into competitive youth academies from an early age.

But in FM terms, this is all irrelevant to me. How do you code in the fact that facilities at, say, Manchester United are state-of-the-art, but won't necessarily produce the best players because of the culture? Basically, how do you code in the culture in this country? My answer - you don't. Keep it away from the game, for the reasons I've already mentioned.

[Matshit]

Yeah, it’s pretty difficult to implement into the game.

Perhaps something like state-of-the-art training facilities increase the chance of players wanting to sign for you, at least for young players. And increase the number of regens you get every year that has been “stolen” from other teams, but doesn’t actually do too much to help your training, and might actually be negative for low professionalism players.

And a fantastic youth academy gives you higher CA talents, but have no effect on the PA. I think that is closer to how things is in reality, more than that great facilities makes your players better quicker.

My point however was more about the fact that people in England like to explain their problems with factors they can’t do anything about, instead of working on the things they can work on. It has nothing to do with being English, because all the big English clubs sweep up a lot of the biggest foreign talents every year, and the amount of them succeeding is very small.

For all the 15-16 year old talents United have signed, only Rossi, Pique and Pogba has become close to world class. And most likely because they got away in time.

[dirtboy]

What about players who aren't internationally capped in game? Would SI just give them random IA attributes? I voted no, partly for this reason.

[frontier219]

This is a truly awful idea - and ManagerFootball appears to be king of the Straw Man argument. International Football isn't badly represented in FM - England winning a world cup might seem a little far-fetched but it really is only a little. Tournament football always has its surprises.

[Smurf]

- England winning a world cup might seem a little far-fetched but it really is only a little. Tournament football always has its surprises.

Mexico 1970 Quarter-finals

West Germany 1974 Did not qualify

Argentina 1978 Did not qualify

Spain 1982 2nd Group Stage

Mexico 1986 Quarter-finals

Italy 1990 Semi-Finals

United States 1994 Did not qualify

France 1998 Round of 16

South Korea/Japan 2002 Quarter-finals

Germany 2006 Quarter-finals

South Africa 2010 Round of 16

Brazil 2014 Group Stage

Despite all the great players through out the decades, England do not have a good track record at the world cup.

Yet - you say it's only a little far-fetched, where history shows that England have found it nearly impossible to reach the World Cup Finals since 1966 - where the tournament was played in England.

Now - if any of the times England won the World Cup with the current squad of today (in the game) and the tournament was in England - then that's fair enough.

But it simply isn't the case. World Cup is to be held in Russia and Qatar next, respectively, taking it to 2022 - where a 22 year old would be 30 at that stage.

I'm not saying it's impossible for England to win a World Cup in the game. It's just not highly likely.

But then again, nobody expected Greece to win the European Championship.

Then again, there really has never been any shock winners of the World Cup either. And England winning a World Cup would be a shock, considering the strength of other national teams out there at the moment.

And this isn't clearly represented in the game, as the OP stressed that England have won the World Cup in his saves on more than one occasion with the current England team.

Which is the whole point.

[jumbohotdog]

But are England players truly great or have they been overrated because of the premier league.

[Red_Arrow]

English players are not overrated - having previously been an assistant researcher and knowing how players are rated I'd say I'm better qualified than most in this thread to say that. Look at the players individually as part of their club teams and look at how they are viewed by their peers in other leagues: the likes of Ferdinand (I'm personally not a fan, too error prone), Terry, Cole, Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes, Beckham, Rooney,... are/were all well regarded players for a reason, they are/were very good examples of players in their position. Cashley in particular was probably the best LB around for a number of years. Would Mourinho have persisted with Lampard if he had a better option, no! Likewise would Van Gaal have made Rooney captain and shoehorn him into the team at the expense of others. No! Hell would Pellegrini continue to make use of (the imo underrated) James Milner if he wasn't good enough?

Whatever problem England have on the highest stage, and remember this also applies to Spain before '08, the Dutch for many years and the French since 2000 (bar '06), is not related to individual ability of the players. Take the Gerrard/Lampard/Scholes debate. England at one point had three of the best central midfielders in Europe, it was just a shame that the three couldn't work together, but not a shock as they all occupy the same space on the pitch and have fairly similar roles - though I guess Scholes plus one other may have worked in a 4-5-1. More fool the manager(s) that tried to fit them into the same team.

Tactics, football culture, an occasionally limited talent pool (in the past no LM, recently no RB), a combination of unwillingness and cost that prevents players moving overseas in their prime and perhaps a few attitude problems have contributed. Dare I say the 'you shouldn't be proud to be English it makes you a dirty racist' attitude that has sadly pervaded our culture due to racist political parties (that often attach themselves to football) has an impact as well - would an English players be as proud to represent his country as a German? - but it isn't down to the standard of our players.

[Matshit]

I agree that most of those players are pretty good. Some fantastic, some above average. The problem though is that it is 8 players. You don’t win the world cup with 8 players.

For that matter I do think a lot of them are very overrated. Gerrard is a brilliant player, but I always thought he was outclassed by Alonso when they played together. Gerrard was still the one who got the big praises. I agree on Milner being underrated, but his qualities are mostly versatility and hard work. Not something that wins you anything.

The same could be said about the last England born world cup winner, but he played with players like Pirlo and Totti. They had and still has a touch of class you can’t find in England.

Compare with Spain where players like Borja Valero, Bruno Soriano and Dani Parejo is far away from the national team, and every one of them would be a shoe in for the English team.

Still I doubt the regular English fan who consider BPL the best league in the world has even heard their names.

And can I remind you about the time Manuel Almunia and Carlo Cudicini was rumored to get a English passport to play for England?

[Red_Arrow]

Fwiw I don't support a Premier League team, I don't consider the PL the best in the world and yes I have heard of those players (even if I don't necessarily agree with you about them being shoe-ins)! The Almunia/Cudicini rumours were press rumours at a time when we were lacking a number 1, we wouldn't consider them now when we have a clear number 1 and some decent young options around for the gloves, and it is hard to say how seriously they were considered anyway.

8 players but I could have named more who were considered, outside of England, to be good players for their position - G. Neville, Hargreaves, a fit Michael Owen just off the top of my head. I was merely pointing out that the top English players are not overrated in the game, or if they are slightly overrated in the game (such as Rooney a few seasons ago, good player on his day but not a top player) it is down to the individual researcher and isn't an institutional approach by SI to make England win lots. England's relative success - I know they do win 2014 too often, but anything after 2018/22 shouldn't be an issue - isn't to do with overrated players but other factors. Lets not forget the likes of the Ivory Coast, Mexico and Croatia will win the WC in the game as well - are their players overrated?

[m_fenton]

Another reason why this couldn't work is with the newgens, i don't think anyone can be born good at international football or not so how could you even give someone who has never played international football an attribute in it, doesn't make sense to me.

They're not born with ANY natural footballing ability, yet they're given about 10,000* different attributes in it, this isn't any different.

*ish.

[forameuss]

They're not born with ANY natural footballing ability, yet they're given about 10,000* different attributes in it, this isn't any different.

*ish.

But it isn't quite the same. This "feature" is borne out of complaints that English players play too well. Those, I guess, would be specifically added to these players. For newgens there is no frame of reference for this as to how you assign a value. It could be completely random, but then there would be little point in it. It could be driven off nationality, but then that would just make the big nations bigger and cease competition.

It's also different as this attribute would make every other attribute the player holds considerably less relevant. As someone put it earlier in the thread, it creates two players. One could be a 190CA monster that plays for the club, that becomes a 150CA average player. What's the point in that?

[Smurf]

England's problem internationally is that all England players play in England. They isn't enough diverse experience globally.

Spain, Germany, France, Brazil, Portugal etc. all have their international players playing in top teams globally.

Englands players who have experience playing Champions League football this year:

1. Joe Hart
   
2. Gary Cahill
   
3. Gibbs
   
4. Wishere
   
5. Chamberlain
   
6. Wellbeck (didn't get game at Utd)
   
7. Gerrard
   

These are up coming players with no experience playing top level competitive football

1. Chambers
   
2. Henderson
   
3. Lallana
   
4. Sterling
   

Older players benched at club

1. Milner
   
2. Lambert
   

The rest of the squad play for teams in Europa League, or no European football at all for clubs fighting for a mid-table place.

The problem with the England squad - there's not enough players playing top top level of football.

[Schotsmannetje]

In my humble opinion there shouldn't be an international adaptability stat, because I feel that the difference between how a player performs for his club and for his country is the result of a difference in both team morale and the players confidence. In my opinion some players just lack confidence when they play for their country. Maybe too much pressure gets to them when they play for their national team, or too much negative attention from the press, of a combination of both. If you catch my drift.

Some players perform better for their country than for their club, also. I don't think that it's just the 'international' factor that influences them when they play for their country. It's just a difference in morale and/or confidence.

[ManagerFootball]

So have we concluded the researchers are to blame for over rating english talent? If so should they not be replaced as this has been an issue for at least ten years.

[Schotsmannetje]

In my opinion there's nothing wrong with English players. There is just a complete absence of morale and confidence in that team. Many ex-internationals have said that most players don't even want to play for England because of all the pressure and negative attention. I can remember this being a big debate last season.

[Cavenagh]

So have we concluded the researchers are to blame for over rating english talent? If so should they not be replaced as this has been an issue for at least ten years.

Nothing has been concluded.

If you think a player, any player, is incorrectly rated then take it to the Data Forum. That's what it's there for.

[ManagerFootball]

Nothing has been concluded.

If you think a player, any player, is incorrectly rated then take it to the Data Forum. That's what it's there for.

So what have we concluded then? Everything is all good in the land of international?

[Smurf]

It's the pressure from the media that makes England look bad. Win a friendly against San Marino and you're touted to win the wolrd cup. Draw against a team in a qualifier and you're lambasted by the media.

It is the media propaganda that's pressure on the players.

And it clearly has an impact in real life.

[ManagerFootball]

It's the pressure from the media that makes England look bad. Win a friendly against San Marino and you're touted to win the wolrd cup. Draw against a team in a qualifier and you're lambasted by the media.

It is the media propaganda that's pressure on the players.

And it clearly has an impact in real life.

How do we replicate that in the game? Do we link Media Pressure to International performances? How do we do it man?

[jumbohotdog]

The English media is to blame they are the ones who tend to overhype the young players. Rooney as a teenager up to Sterling now they are all branded as the next great England hope

[ManagerFootball]

The English media is to blame they are the ones who tend to overhype the young players. Rooney as a teenager up to Sterling now they are all branded as the next great England hope

So we are kind of concluding that media pressure should be linked to performances in some way? So each federation will need a media handling/pressure stat? How would we do it?

[frontier219]

I still personally don't see England winning the WC as some hugely unlikely occurrance. A fit England side on it's day could beat any team - this is tournament football, you have to have luck on your side - a key ingredient in real life that all of you seem to be missing - when Spain won the WC in 2010 they were clearly one of the better sides, but every win was a 1-0 and it would've taken a single fluke to have knocked them out in some of their games. FM is a simulation, when England won the WC in your game did other sides have key players injured? Did England have a fairly easy route to the final? So many questions that it is completely unfair to change the whole system (Which, IMO, isn't broken - but with the number of people who play this game is always going to throw up freak occurrances and results) based on a few people moaning that England won the WC. Get over it.

[ManagerFootball]

Yes cause england dominating the international scene for 4 years culminating in Hodgson riding into the sunset with a world cup and euro championship in his hands is a great story bro. Awesomes.

[frontier219]

Mexico 1970 Quarter-finals

West Germany 1974 Did not qualify

Argentina 1978 Did not qualify

Spain 1982 2nd Group Stage

Mexico 1986 Quarter-finals

Italy 1990 Semi-Finals

United States 1994 Did not qualify

France 1998 Round of 16

South Korea/Japan 2002 Quarter-finals

Germany 2006 Quarter-finals

South Africa 2010 Round of 16

Brazil 2014 Group Stage

Despite all the great players through out the decades, England do not have a good track record at the world cup.

Okay, fine. Let's imagine it's 2009 and look at Spain's WC track record over the same period:

1962: Group Stage

1966: Group Stage

1970: DNQ

1974: DNQ

1978: Group Stage

1982: 2nd Group Stage

1986: QF

1990: Last 16

1994: QF

1998: Group Stage

2002: QF

2006: Last 16

We know now that they went on to win in 2010 with a very talented squad, but they had always been considered bottlers and underachievers before this. Should SI have programmed that in? No, of course not - they won the previous Euros. WC records in earlier years are no real indiction of how a team will fare.

[frontier219]

Yes cause england dominating the international scene for 4 years culminating in Hodgson riding into the sunset with a world cup and euro championship in his hands is a great story bro. Awesomes.

Yes it is. And that's exactly with FM delivers. Stories. Not real life. Otherwise why not just program in that only City or Chelsea will win the PL in the first season. Your entire argument seems to be based on the fact that you don't like the England national team. I read a similar article from some guy who was an Arsenal fan and got all upset that Spurs finished top of the league and how 'overpowered' they were. The game tries to reflect real life but if there were no room for maneouver then it would cease to be entertaining because if you started as a small team you'd never win anything. Seriously get over yourself, despite your holier than thou attitude you don't represent a majority of the people who play the game.

[Schotsmannetje]

Another thing that has always struck me with England is that England haven't had a decent national coach in ages. I mean, look at them all. How many of them have actually managed a squad with decent players and performed well recently?

Roy Hodgson was sacked by Liverpool and was critisized by many because he couldn't deal with big name players. Capello was once a great coach, but was sacked at Real Madrid because of poor play (although the results were alright) and hasn't performed with Russia very well (were third in the group stage at the WC after a 1-1 draw with Algeria). Don't even get me started on Steve McLaren, Eriksson did alright at Man City, but after his England reign he hasn't managed a single decent club or country (which should tell you something).

What you guys need is a decent national coach. That alone should make a big difference.

[frog-kvfb]

what would you do in the case of a player like david healy who was average at club level yet excelled at international level what stat would you give him

[ManagerFootball]

Another thing that has always struck me with England is that England haven't had a decent national coach in ages. I mean, look at them all. How many of them have actually managed a squad with decent players and performed well recently?

Roy Hodgson was sacked by Liverpool and was critisized by many because he couldn't deal with big name players. Capello was once a great coach, but was sacked at Real Madrid because of poor play (although the results were alright) and hasn't performed with Russia very well (were third in the group stage at the WC after a 1-1 draw with Algeria). Don't even get me started on Steve McLaren, Eriksson did alright at Man City, but after his England reign he hasn't managed a single decent club or country (which should tell you something).

What you guys need is a decent national coach. That alone should make a big difference.

Capello has been earning in his twilight good for him. To say he is a bad manager though is absurd, totally absurd. Everyone gets sacked at Real so that point is a bit trivial. Russia are worse than England, are you really going to dismiss his past and say he hasnt won anything with Russia so he is a bad manager.

Infact I blame both Capello and the Players for not ADAPTING to each other during his time with England.

With that and this whole debate in mind, it seems a mixture of manager abilities and media pressure linked to player performance is a better path to explore. I still think some of the onus is defo on the players. You cant blame the manager 100%.

[ManagerFootball]

what would you do in the case of a player like david healy who was average at club level yet excelled at international level what stat would you give him

This stat idea is becoming dead I concede, but to just answer that anyway you would have to have a system where you could reflect the fact he does better for nation than club.

I think though with everyone's input that a media pressure style system and a managers past success rate would be a better route to influencing player peformance to a degree in Internationals.

[Schotsmannetje]

Capello has been earning in his twilight good for him. To say he is a bad manager though is absurd, totally absurd. Everyone gets sacked at Real so that point is a bit trivial. Russia are worse than England, are you really going to dismiss his past and say he hasnt won anything with Russia so he is a bad manager.

Infact I blame both Capello and the Players for not ADAPTING to each other during his time with England.

With that and this whole debate in mind, it seems a mixture of manager abilities and media pressure linked to player performance is a better path to explore. I still think some of the onus is defo on the players. You cant blame the manager 100%.

You are twisting my words. I never said Capello WAS a bad manager. I just think that his coaching style is very outdated. And in my opinion that's true for many national managers England has had the last decade or so.

[ManagerFootball]

You are twisting my words. I never said Capello WAS a bad manager. I just think that his coaching style is very outdated. And in my opinion that's true for many national managers England has had the last decade or so.

Tell Italian players his methods are out-dated. Sure they won him the title with Real too. It's a cultural thing if anything. English players cry if they have to be away in a foreign country for 2 weeks. Seriously so you cant see your girlfriend for two weeks, big ******* deal.

[Schotsmannetje]

Even in Italy his methods would be outdated nowadays. Do you actually watch Serie A? Most teams there nowadays play a neat posession game with an attacking mentality. Even the national team has had runs of games with good attacking football. Serie A is actually quite a nice league to watch football-wise. It's just that the stadiums lack character and atmosphere that ruins the league. And besides, it's more difficult not to win the league with the squad he had as his disposal at Real Madrid at the time.

Even if it would be a cultural thing as you say, that would just completely support my point that England has not had a decent national manager. A national manager that doesn't suit the culture of the country is not a decent manager for that country.

[ManagerFootball]

How would you go around rating which managers are good fits with what football cultures?

[Schotsmannetje]

That's not so difficult surely? Take us Dutch folk for example. We like attacking possession play in a 433 formation with wingers. Managers that only have results on their mind and don't care about the style of play will never be accepted as decent managers in Holland. Even Bert van Marwijk, who managed to get us to the final of the World Cup in 2010, was slaughtered in Holland because he played aggressively and defensively (in our opinion anyway). I'm guessing managers like Mourinho and Benitez who normally don't really care about possession that much would never be popular in Holland no matter the results. Even Frank de Boer, who gave Ajax 4 League Titles in a row as manager, is critisized by the Ajax supporters because they play without decent wingers.

Many countries have a favorite style of football and so do managers. They can clash. Even FM itself keeps track of managers' style of play.

[ManagerFootball]

That's not so difficult surely? Take us Dutch folk for example. We like attacking possession play in a 433 formation with wingers. Managers that only have results on their mind and don't care about the style of play will never be accepted as decent managers in Holland. Even Bert van Marwijk, who managed to get us to the final of the World Cup in 2010, was slaughtered in Holland because he played aggressively and defensively (in our opinion anyway). I'm guessing managers like Mourinho and Benitez who normally don't really care about possession that much would never be popular in Holland no matter the results. Even Frank de Boer, who gave Ajax 4 League Titles in a row as manager, is critisized by the Ajax supporters because they play without decent wingers.

Many countries have a favorite style of football and so do managers. They can clash. Even FM itself keeps track of managers' style of play.

So under your method how would Roy Hodgson do? Good fit for england national team?

[Schotsmannetje]

So under your method how would Roy Hodgson do? Good fit for england national team?

Culturally yes, quality-wise no. I think that he has shown as Liverpool manager that he has difficulties with dealing with high profile players, which is really one of the most important aspects of being a national manager. But to be honest that's not an assessment I have made myself, that's a conclusion I base on newspaper articles and BBC reports.

And if I look at the way he's dealing with both the Sturridge and Sterling situations, I get the impression that the above stated assessment isn't that far off.