Why didnt England Qualify

Why didnt England qualify?

Poor Management / Tactics
72
48%
Poor Players
19
13%
Poor Attitude
36
24%
The English style of play
13
9%
Poor development of technical skills
10
7%
 
Total votes: 150
topnotch
Classic Winner
Tips
Posts: 966
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: manchester

Postby topnotch » Fri Nov 23, 2007 3:03 pm

all of these professional players have played in a 4-5-1 at some time in their careers. both crouch and gerrard have done so for liverpool, chelsea under mourinho have played with the lone striker system, but now they suddenly lose all basic knowledge of playing in shifting formations? are the players that thick or amateurish? do me a favour.
top rugby tipster april 2007

BoozyBeggar
Group 2 Class
Tips
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:00 am

Postby BoozyBeggar » Fri Nov 23, 2007 7:23 pm

It's a bit sad that "Missing Players" doesn't feature in the poll list.

Lescott and Campbell or Ferdinand and Terry? Owen and Rooney or Crouch plus any midfielder? Wouldn't those four upgrades be worth a goal? Carragher. Scholes.

That said, "Missing Players" would be my number two choice. Poor management / tactics was the crucial factor. Hurt us in the winnable games we didn't win. Hurt us in the last match too.

Come the interviews, first question should be: can Lampard and Gerrard play together? Anyone who says "Yes" should be shown the door immediately.

And playing a rookie keeper in our most important international for over a decade was ultimate dumb. Experience does matter, at every level: we need a coach who has proven himself at international level already.

STUBBLE
Classic Winner
Tips
Posts: 715
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 12:00 am
Location: WALSALL

Postby STUBBLE » Fri Nov 23, 2007 8:16 pm

After Germany, there was some blindingly obvious problems with the national side.

1) Beckham had become increasingly static and unfit, which meant not only did he become easier to mark but was also tracking back less to help his full back.
2) The Lampard/Gerrard combination in midfield simply didn't work.
3) We needed to find a back up for Owen, especially given the frequency and length of his injuries.
4) We needed to keep possession better instead of constantly giving the ball away and have more imagination going forward

McLaren hasn't had the best of fortune with injuries and doesn't necessarily have the depth of quality that some would like to believe but that is not enough of an excuse.

He showed a reluctance to experiment in friendlies either with formations or new players. Playing players like Owen, Beckham and David James in such games seemed pointless particularly when Owen gets injured playing in a meaningless friendly against Austria.

McLaren showed himself to be tactically inept against Croatia. The idea of one up front is for the ball to be played into his feet so the striker can hold it up long enough to bring others into the game. Instead of this, the England players punted 60 yard balls to Crouch who could only flick them on, but we didn't have a second striker to get on the end of the flicks. The wide men were too far away to support and by the time Gerrard and Lampard got there, the Croatians had regained possession and were bearing down on an inexperienced back line. You can blame the players for lacking intelligence but ultimately it is up to the manager to get the message across.

One of the major factors in England's good results has been the inclusion of Barry who tends to find space and when he gets the ball, almost always passes it to a team mate, a quality many of his more illustrious colleagues don't always possess. However, when it came to the crunch, who did the manager put his faith in? - Beckham on the wing with Gerrard and Lampard in the middle whilst the two strikers he brought on can't get in Spurs' first team.

In a way, this could be a blessing in disguise. Hopefully, a new man will come in who won't be afraid to bruise a few egos and will pick what he thinks is his best team, not his best 11 players. We can call time on Beckham's international career and maybe look to blood more of the Under 21 players such as Young, Agbonlahor and Derbyshire. It's time for England to bring someone in who will look to build a team for the future, rather than just lurch from one campaign to the next making the same mistakes every time.
Confidence in tips ranges from the most confident which is 5 stars to least which is 1.

If you fire enough arrows, one or two are bound to hit the target

AcesJones
Triple Crown Winner
Tips
Posts: 1172
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Nearest Pub, W Yorks

Postby AcesJones » Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:57 pm

I do think an option for "All of the above" would have gathered a large number of votes.
I cant really add much to this thread that hasn't been said already. I did site that "Poor Management/Tactics" as the main reason for England's downfall.
I believe that this was the case because Steve McLaren, like Sven, picked a system to accommodate his players rather than the other way round. This forced a number a players to play out of position and in a style that they rarely employ at club level on a weekly basis. These frailties showed game in game out on the international stage.

The only good thing to come from this very disappointing qualifying campaign is the inevitable sacking of Steve McLaren.

Onwards and upwards :hope:
"He who is not courageous enough to take risks will accomplish nothing in life."

Roger Green
Triple Crown Winner
Tips
Posts: 2243
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 12:00 am
Location: WEST COUNTRY
Contact:

Postby Roger Green » Fri Nov 23, 2007 10:09 pm

I really believe that technically we have fallen behind most countries. This is confirmed by he number of " foreign" players, playing in the premiership....Most of the stars are foreign, all of them are better ball players....How many foreign players wre good enough for the Premiership say 10 years ago....far fewer than today... there are less home grown players available for England and it will only get worse

BoozyBeggar
Group 2 Class
Tips
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:00 am

Postby BoozyBeggar » Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:37 pm

rerykama wrote:
When will people in this country realise that we are a 2nd class footballing nation
Well, if we are a "2nd class footballing nation", which nations are first class? Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Italy, more recently France. Is it really so bad to be a class behind these?

welshie1
At Stud
Tips
Posts: 3570
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 11:00 pm

Postby welshie1 » Sun Nov 25, 2007 1:26 am

Although I am not English, my viewpoint is England's problems go all the way down to the Grassroots and the Academys. There are so many foreigners in the Premiership at the moment and I would think the Premiership is bottom of British players playing week in week out. If you look at the England team a lot of the players dont start especially the Squad numbers. There should be a quota of at least 5 British players in the starting line up, how are these young players going to get discovered by going on loan to a lower league club or in the reserves, they are not are they? I think if there was a quota I would think all 5 Home nations performances would improve. And it can be done all of Italy's World Cup winning squad played in Italy and they became World Champions.

spider2097
Triple Crown Winner
Tips
Posts: 1444
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:00 pm
Location: Bromborough, UK

Postby spider2097 » Sun Nov 25, 2007 2:03 am

Quotas (if that's the correct plural of "quota") are a red herring designed to feed the minds of xenophobic among England supporters. With EU regulations the way they are, many of the top teams in the English Premiership fill this requirement easily. It's against European law to introduce a regulation that would require a set number of English players per team or limit "foreign" players. Plus it would only serve to drive up the price of English players even more. The price of English players is a huge problem at the minute. £17m for Darren Bent? Can anyone else not see this problem?

If it's to do with the number of English players in the Premiership, how do you explain the relative success of the Northern Irish side?

It's possible to point at the Scottish team & say "Since the Glaswegian sides started employing more Scottish players, the Scottish team improved.", but again it doesn't really answer the problem. It's entirely possible to say the Welsh overperformed due to the fact they had to pick a large number of players from outside the EPL. Again, it misses the point.

The reason England didn't perform well is due to the players on the pitch not working together as a team. A good coach/manager gets talented individuals working together well. That's true in whatever sphere of work that takes place.

I have no doubt whatsoever that there are world class English players. Until they learn how to work together as a team, they'll only be world class individuals.

The "Head Coach" is also at fault as he picked the perceived most talented individuals rather than players who were in form & getting games at the time. Selecting Bent, Defoe & Crouch for the squad - all players who have not been getting regular games - was a sign of naivety. Yes, Carson has been playing well for Aston Villa but surely for a crunch game if you're going to drop Robinson then David James was the better option rather than a player making his competitive debut? There are plenty of English players getting regular games for their clubs that could of/would of/should of been picked & maybe performed better than the players that were chosen.

There was a huge outcry when Carragher retired from international football. His reason was that he was behind defenders coming back from injury despite his imperious club form. He wasn't getting the international games in the first place, why shout him down? If he can't keep his place when Woodgate gets chosen after 1 game back from injury, why should he be bothered? There wasn't the same outcry when Paul Scholes retired from international football & he was a much more important player for England than Carragher ever was.

The majority of the team last Wednesday knows that whatever the result they'll more than likely be picked for the next game.

That is the problem.
"There's no such thing as a grown-up. We get bigger, we get taller, we get older. But, for the most part, we're still a bunch of kids, running around the playground, trying desperately to fit in."

thatsa donkey
Triple Crown Winner
Tips
Posts: 2203
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:00 pm

Postby thatsa donkey » Sun Nov 25, 2007 1:04 pm

I think that poor tactics was the 'most' important reason we lost. But I do agree that there should have been an injured players option and an all of the above option.

The best available english players cannot be expected to perform when playing out of position. The formation should fit the squads strengths. We do need better coaching and skills training for young players who show a great deal of promise, we should be employing the best retired players from all over the globe to be teaching them.

We dont have a chance of being a great footballing nation until we invest more in training in all aspects of the game.

Donkey. :hope: :win: :hope:

willieboy
Classic Winner
Tips
Posts: 889
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 11:00 pm

Postby willieboy » Sun Nov 25, 2007 5:26 pm

As said...def. some of all the reasons.....but starting with Crouch
upfront on his own shows negativity from the start.

We`re at home so why not play attacking football with players
in their correct positions. The biggest loss was Rooney and Owen.
They would have made a difference...goes to show we don`t
have quality in depth.

Far too much money in the game......no incentive to give your
all....still get a kings ransom no matter what happens. It`s about
time this happened!!....25% of wages if you lose....50% of wages
for a draw...full wages for a win (every week, not just Int games)

They`ll be booking their trips to the Caribbean as we speak!

Controversial or what!?!

Clacton
Handicapper
Tips
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 12:00 am

Postby Clacton » Sun Nov 25, 2007 9:10 pm

As with probably all of you I watched the game on Wednesday and was disappointed with the performance. The pitch was not fit for a major international football game. The FA have a friendly game the friday before the last qualifying game why? money or assumptions that England would have qualified already? No stadium in the world has cost as much money and we allow a US soccer game to destroy the pitch. The FA deserve not to have qualified. If I was in charge as soon as Chelsea released Mourhino he should have been approached to see if he would be interested. McClaren was part of the previous management and should not have been given the position. I have read in the press that Shearer should be cobsidered How and Why? somestimes I believe that the FA is run by idiots no successfull company would allow some of the decisions that have been made by them.

brewster39
Triple Crown Winner
Tips
Posts: 2393
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:00 am

Postby brewster39 » Mon Nov 26, 2007 7:40 pm

I chose poor players but all of the options definately had something to do with it. Attitude was a dis-grace, that kinda comes under poor players. McClarens tactics were shocking...

- changing keepers in arguably the most important game of his international career

- setting out with a 4-3-3, too attacking when you only need a draw? beyond me that one, could not understand the logic behind that one bit

- lampard/gerrard combo...how many games will it take for him to realise itjust simply does not work

...all of the above were why we did not qualify for the euros
brewsty39

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users