blonde poker forum

Are England the most bummed up team in football ?

Every time the world cup comes to town we always hear how england have the potential to win the world cup.

As soon as they meet a half-decent team they get pumped.

When will the english commentaters learn England will never win because they're overrated and dont play like a team.

Too many superstars and not enough team players.

WAYNE ROONEY what was that !!! best in the world cmon

Schoolboy defending ripped apart by a young german team.

Get real guys at the start of the world cup it was " they can go all the way" "we are one of the favourites" etc etc.
JUST ACCEPT IT UR SHIT AND U KNOW UR !!!!

I think it's time that the England players got paid a bit more.

Clearly 150k per week isn't enough motivation to play well.

We would of won the world cup if there was goal line technology....

I've been saying this from the start. Don't know why people don't seem to understand this.

Ah well. Bring on Euro 2012! We'll win that one!

I think the fact they earn so much is their downfall...big time charlies who think they pwn the world!!! The reality is a lot of them are very very average

Also the media circus that bums up/over emphasises/over values all of your players doesnt help...players based in england go for at least 3x going rate than anywhere else with the wages to match...players like milner/barry etc going for ridic sums of money makes all you lot think they are great players when in fact they're average but just lucky enough to come from a country with the best marketed football league in the world.

PS mods shouldnt this be in sport discusssion? We are talking about the football team and not the country right?

Not in Scotland they ain't.

Sandy

FYP

In answer to the OP question - YES

But......... if we want the country to improve then lets stick with a manager for a few years instead of changing every 2-4 years.

OK, so you lost. Let's not make Emile out of it.

you schweinsteiger!!

So a Frenchman an Italian and an Englishman get on a plane... 

lol @ "always get pumped" this was our worst result.
We usually lack bottle and lose on penalties thanks.

and get shown scotlands world cup highlights

whilst fastening their seatbelts.........

England are "normally" ranked somewhere between 4 and 8 in the FIFA world rankings, and "normally" get knocked out in the Quarter Finals, so whether they're overrated really comes down to which people are doing the rating.

nice

aftertiming is great innit

lol..is it still after timing if you've said it 2 years ago, and 4 years ago, and 6 years ago, and 8 years ago, and 10 years ago, and 12 years ago..etc..etc (Just about every 2 years)?

Got to love the scots

FACTS:

1   Brazil Brazil   1611   0   Equal
2   Spain Spain   1565   0   Equal
3   Portugal Portugal   1249   0   Equal
4   Netherlands Netherlands   1231   0   Equal
5   Italy Italy   1184   0   Equal
6   Germany Germany   1082   0   Equal
7   Argentina Argentina   1076   0   Equal
8   England England   1068   0   Equal
9   France France   1044   1   Up
10   Croatia Croatia   1041   -1   Down
.
.
43     Scotland

So are England the most overrated?  Surely being in the top 8 teams means we had a chance and by definition Italy beat us to it this time as most overated.

We are/have been/ will be grossly overrated. What price do you  think we were pre World Cup in any other countries ?? I'm guessing 25/1 and I think thats a fair eflection of the chance we held. Club not country ftw...

GFY

Ship the $10 Monda. TIA

england was 5th favourite in hong kong

to win their group...........

dont think italy were rated in this world cup
pretty sure ppl only rated the argies spain and brazil

Surely we need to be looking at the future now?  The likes of Hart, Dawson, Huddlestone, Walcott, Lennon, Carrick, Jenas all need to step up now.

Out with the old guard, they clearly cannot play together.

Carrick's 30 next year!

JENAS!

(http://www.rusrs.com/rusrs.jpg)

Well, who else is there then?

Two holding midfielders from rodwell, hargreaves, huddlestone, cattermole please.

Adam Johnson, naturally left sided winger, only 23.

What I am saying is 4-4-2 doesn't cut it, leaves us short in the middle

Hypothesise


                         Hart

Johnson     Dawson      Smalling              Gibbs


                 Rodwell      Huddlestone

 Milner                    Wilshere             A Johnson

                           Rooney


plug in gosling, moses, cleverly etc where you wish



that's the sort of set up and names that might have us competitive in 2014. Begin now, try it for Euro 2012


No point picking anyone over 30 from here

Agbonlahor.

and the advantage of having two sitters is your full backs can bomb on. Ramos. Maicon etc etc

Now find the young lads, play them in the system every chance you have...then overhype them see them fail and start again

Sorry, can no longer take your foootball posts seriously now that you've used that phrase

lol, welcome to the world of the youth coach.

but seriously, Maicon and Ramos and co can only be auxiliary wingers if the holding midfielders sit in and cover. Watch Barry again v Germany...caught too far up the pitch repeatedly, and nowhere when they countered.

OK, I'll let you off Mr Coach Sir :-)

Arsenal are a good example of a team that are not competitive now, since they no longer have any players who can play the holding role e.g (can't believe I'm going to say this) Grimandi.

But, more seriously, for Grimandi you could swap, Petit, Vieira, Gilberto, Edu and a whole raft of players that made our team much stronger than they are now.

When I think about it, there's more than I thought, agree with about 7 or 8 of these picks, we just got to change the thought process and get away from the Gerrard, Lampard thing now. 

Alot of exciting attaking players there.

Why not? Lampard at 36 may be too old but Gerrard for example will be just on the brink of 33/34 and in the shape he keeps himself in he'll certainly be playing an influential role at that stage. I also really like CBs between 30-35 as they just read the game better and dont ever panic.

Dawson, Cahill and Jagielka will be experienced enough by the next world cup if we get them in now. Not quite 30 i think but i'd prefer them to Terry and Rio who could be past it.
Undecided over Gerrard but deffo the end of Lampard. Cetainly wouldn't want Gerrard as captain as i don't want him to be seen as a key player for the next world cup.

Don't like this at all really. It's short term thinking. England should accept that the next 4 years or so will be a rebuilding period and they are going to be (or stay) shit for a while with the aim of success in 6-8 years.

100% agree, with the above. England should have a 18-25 strategy to start with, if you fall outside that your not in.

Lose games yes,,but gain experience and momentum over the next 6 years.

The country would be behind such a plan.

Experience wins world cups though. Do we just write off 2014 then?

like geoff hurst?

Yes, in the same way that the Germans had the guts to write off 2010. It's the only way to actually win one, one day.

i wonder if the players would play better for England if they didn't give their fee to charity?

it seems to be money is the motivator at club level....

Talk about hysteria!! Jesus Christ!

People really need to get their heads out of the clouds if they think the senior players are not going to be a part of the Euro 2012 campaign.

Terry and Ferdinand are still 2 of the best centre-backs in the game,as are Gerrard and Lampard with regards to midfield.Ashley Cole is still the best left-back in the game.

Do people really think that there is going to be a qualifying campaign on a major championships going on with a squad consisting of players from Everton,Spurs,Villa and god knows whoever else while the likes of Terry,Lmaprd,Cole,Gerrard and Ferdinand are competing for league titles and playing against the best Europe has to offer in the Champions League? Wake up imo.

Yes get the likes of Jagielka,Dawson,Cahill,Shawcross,Gibbs,Rodwell,Johnson,Wilshere,Young,Agbonlahor,Sturridge etc involved but do it slowly and gradually ffs.

If you throw them in too soon and it doesn't take off the press will hound them as much as they do the players now,it's what they do.You'll end up killing their international careers before they've even begun!!

The players are there to have a go at Euro2012,it's just down to whether or not Capello has learned from this summer that he got the camp and formation wrong.

He's talking about introducing mew players to give the squad a new energy,I think this makes sense but most f them should be involved as squad players,they can still bring a whole lot of energy to the camp in training while at the same time soaking up as much experience as possible.

The same players,allowed to relax and express themselves,in a 433 or 451 formation could go into 2012 as a threat.I've said all along that 442 is dead,no top team plays it for a reason,it is too easily ran-over.

Apart from the formation one other major change is needed,and that is to have a "dog" in midfield.Not one midfielder that went to South Africa could tackle.Barry is not that player,neither is Carrick,Huddlestone never has been and never will be.Rodwell could be that player but needs time,he may well be too cultured too good a footballer to be limited to that role.

It needs someone who is an absolute terrier,who will never stop running and put their body on the line time and time again.If Hargreaves can regain fitness he would be ideal,if not the next best option would be Parker and then Cattermole.These two are not as great on the ball as they would be ideally but you need to have someone of that type in the side,what they lack for in talent they make up for in effort and in how much they disrupt and break up opposition attacks.It's the role that Makelele made famous and now every top side has one,Toure,Mascherano,Busquets,Gilberto Silva,Mikel,De Rossi,Diarra.

I know I went on a bit for someone who isn't even English but there's so much rubbish being written/spoken by so called experts all over the media it is unreal!

I think most people were talking about next world cup. The players that will hopefully be household names in 4 years time.
It was reported today that a number of England players are considering their future now that Capello is staying so i don't think anybody knows for sure which players will be involved.

Yeah but i've heard a lot talking about changing it now.

The next generation need to prove themselves at club level first,most of the ones being talked about haven't even played 50 first team games.

And like it or not then next generation are not even remotely close to being as talented as this one.

But you have to build towards the next WC, that is the point. That is what Germany are doing/have done and this is the right way to do it IMO.
You can't build a team for the next WC if you will always use Terry, Ferdinand, Lampard and Gerrard. Ofcourse they are the best now but right now, you're out of the WC...and right now doesn't count anymore.

If Gerrard and Lampard had kicked a ball for England recently then you would have to play them. However it amazes me that they both still are considered must starts given how bad they have performed over many games. They have proven that they just can't cut it at international level no matter how their club careers are going and how high a level they play at.

As a Scot i hope you keep playing them.

Sandy

I'm not,we never got there  ;)

It's a complete myth that the Germans conciously decided to scrap it all and start afresh with youngsters.A myth that has again been fabricated by the media who's lack of knowledge is unbelievable.

If you look at their 2006 squad you see the likes of Lehmann(was 36),Nowotny(was 32),Neuville(was 33),Kahn(was 36),Scneider(was 32).

In 2008 for Joachim Low's first tournament they still had Lehmann(was 38),Frings(was 32),Neuville(was 35),Klose(was 30),Enke(was 31),Ballack(was 31)

Even for this World Cup they were going in with a 33 year old Ballack as captain and a 32 year old Klose as their main striker.

All that has happend is that most of the more experienced players became too old(36+) and the newer generation happen to be better and more talented than everything else that's available.

Ballack and Klose are proof that if there were more older players who were as good as the youngsters then they'd be in the squad,it just so happens Germany have/are producing a lot of young talent in recent years that are better than what they had,again which is not the case with England.

As mentioned before we were 2nd only to Germany at the last Euro u21 tournament and are U17 Euro Champions. If we're not producing youngsters then i fear for the rest of Europe. The players mentioned as being ready in 4 years are all good players and better than you give them credit for. They just need to play and develop.

Lol we can all offer up an example in favour of our argument. ie Italy 2006.

so, was it all an overreaction? were we just beaten by one of the best international sides of recent years? germany v argentina looks to have put things into perspective imo, they were battered while we scored 2, hit the woodwork and just got caught out a few times chasing the game

Lets not forget exhibit A, scraping through the a group that you should have owned on paper. Ghana then Uruguay would have been your route to a semi with Holland if you could have scored more than 2 goals in 270 minutes against the USA, Algeria and Slovakia. (or was it Slovenia, I can't remember tbh)

I'm not saying we're great, just that we're not the shockingly bad team that the overreactionaments would suggest

Maybe it was the Argies we were overrating, possibly we changed our mind too soon when they were beating mediocre sides and forgot they had a madman for a manager. Who's tactical knowledge could be written on the back of a postage stamp.

Talented sure, a good team I am not so sure.

I'm guilty of that. Was all ready for the Argies to go all the way and then joining a facebook campaign to detox Gazza and stick him in a suit before making him next England manager.

As the whole of England falls silent watching Germany storm through world cup, there is a little whisper in the background,

"Look Philip, we're going to win!".

I've seen quotes from both Mascherano and Makelele really rating Hargreaves in this position even before most of England realised he was any good. We miss him terribly IMHO.

4-2-3-1

Look at Spain, great formation when you have good footballers. Tough to break down, allows the full backs to attack too

Even though they seem to need two players to replace the role Senna played for them, look at how they pick Busquets and Alonso and leave Fabregas out


Sadly I expect British football will stick to 4-4-2 for another decade



Just wish they would try this...the kids plus a few of the old timers while transitioning



                       Hart

 Johnson    Dawson    Terry   A Cole

            Hargreaves  Rodwell 

        Milner    Gerrard     A Johnson

                   Rooney


introducing  Wilshere, Gibbs etc etc before Euros, assuming we qualify, for experience ahead of WC2014                                 

It's funny that not 4 years ago Utd fans (and many more around the country) were chanting 4-4-2 at their managers when this formation was first employed regularly.

A couple fo things I would say about this formation. Firstly in 2008 Senna was backed up more regularly by Xavi (who is more attacking now) and Marchena was adept at the DM role and could step up from the back. But in reality you are correct, the current Spain formation is not like for like with 2008. Busquets is no Senna. Spain now play a narrow 4-4-2 and play four CMs.

The only thing I don't like with our version of it is that we have no "quarter-back" DM, like Alonso. Carrick isn't good enough IMHO.

Bang on IMO....

There are few players who could sensitively and eloquently offer their sentiments on England’s troubles at the World Cup, especially without sounding at least slightly condescending. But Xabi Alonso managed to do just that in a lengthy interview with The Sunday Times this weekend. His assessment of the English game is both honest and astute and, with regards to the cultural connotations of English football, he admits an advancement of thinking is required for international success to stand a chance.

“For me it is very important to have players in a team who complement one another. Sometimes the 11 best do not make the best 11. You have to have players with different qualities and, in my opinion, the England team had too many players who can run all day long, who invest a huge physical effort, who attack and defend – ‘box to box’, as they say in England. But the way I understand the game, you also need someone who delivers short passes, even if they seem innocuous at the time. That sort of player has been missing from the England team.”

Alonso was at pains to stress that he didn’t wish to come across as an ‘opportunist’ or being ‘wise after the event’ but his knowledge comes from being a direct factor in Steven Gerrard’s repeated match-winning performances. He reiterated that Gerrard is a ‘great player [who] inspires and leads’ but also that he needs players of different skills around him to play his best. It’s certainly no coincidence that Alonso’s departure has been difficult for Liverpool, as would the departure of any world class player, but the impact has indelibly affected Gerrard’s output. Especially in the 2008/2009 campaign, Liverpool highlighted the growing importance of a trident relationship in midfield (as commented in a previous article) of destroyer-passer-creator (Mascherano-Alonso-Gerrard). One shields, one distributes, one creates – and this is an example, not a perfect model for England to replicate, of players with markedly differing skill sets complementing one another superbly.

I don’t think it is a surprise to note that Owen Hargreaves was widely derided in England prior to the 2006 World Cup for being a player who lacked telling contributions in matches. His worth was underestimated until the competition began and, by the end, he was England’s best performer. There are multiple reasons for this: the international game is more akin to the rest of Europe (Hargreaves had the added experience of honing his abilities at Bayern Munich, where the ‘rhythm’ of the game, as Alonso later alludes to, is starkly contrasting to the English Premier League) and his role of destroying, shielding and simply distributing gained in exposure/acclaim as the competition progressed.

When asked why, Alonso had no definitive answer for the English lacking conviction, sharpness and enjoyment in South Africa. But he did share an experience that goes some way in elucidating his point about the ‘rhythm’ of football playing an incalculable role in individual (and in our case, collective also) output:

“Since I joined Real a year ago I’ve been watching a lot of Premier League games and I think to myself, ‘My god, what a rhythm they play at! And I was playing like that too?’ And yet, here’s the funny thing, which I must confess I am unable to explain: during my first months playing in Spain I’d be more tired than I was in England. There might be a clue here as to what happens to the England players in big international games. The rhythm at that level is not like the rhythm in the Premier League and maybe it’s hard for the English players to adapt to…my impression was that they struggled to enjoy the game.”

This is an effect, rather than the cause, of something far more entrenched in the English game. Countless discussions have raged before and after England’s World Cup exit with regards to the emphasis on skill sets at youth development. To succumb to a generalisation, we place too great an emphasis on physical attributes at the youngest level. Subsequently the pace, tempo, and ‘rhythm’ of our football is far quicker than the rest of Europe. But the danger of our long standing affiliation to grit, determination, strength and pace is that technical proficiency degrades and, when separated from the complementary abilities of their club teammates, English players are exposed.

“I remember when I used to go to the Liverpool Academy I would ask the kids there what their virtues were as football players and the first answer they’d give would be ‘tackling’. Now, that can never be a virtue; that’s a resource that you deploy when needed. Your chief virtue can never be the ability to make a good tackle. Now, I’m just giving one example, but you can extrapolate that there are other qualities that should be given greater priority at youth level. For me the notion of ‘game intelligence’ is so important.”

This is certainly the central issue of Alonso’s argument and it all interlinks to the cultural tenets we connote to typically ‘English’ football. Our young players forgo technique and the finer, more cerebral, aspects of football (tactics, understanding how to play with our teammates, composure when faced with decisions on the pitch) and the result is a noticeable dearth of what Alonso calls ‘game intelligence’. Arrigo Sacchi used to say individuals could be great footballers but terrible players and the adage gains in meaning when juxtaposed with Alonso’s sentiments. We can’t teach game intelligence; it can only be nurtured, honed and experienced from youth academies – in a technically focused manner – through to the professional game.

“It basically means how to associate with other players. The rest follows, the physical aspects, the technical aspects. But understanding the game, that is what is most important.”

Excellent article

+1

The thing with the tackling being a focal point is british wide...even from when I was a kid(and it still goes on) it was always about the winning; so the biggest and strongest kids were the ones who were always selected first as they'd bully and win the ball all the time....but what actually happened was rival teams would also have these giants in their team too so it just descended into a battle of brawn with not much decent football being played.

Some of these guy I played with at under 14's football were absolute beasts...basically fully grown men at 6ft so when you want to win so badly at that level its so easy to see why managers select them 1st but its plainly wrong.

Funnily enough, conversely in Brazil they are doing the opposite of what we think should be happening; in their youth development they are going for more powerful and stronger lads over the footballing side of things but I guess they have the footballing "genius" instilled in them already

It's amazing that one of the reasons soo many young players get rejected in Scotland is because they are "too small". I hardly ever came across that in Holland. (might be different now, I'm not sure but I hope not). Imagine Ajax telling Marc Overmars; "Sorry mate, just not going to happen for you" Or sending Wesley Sneijder home (only 5 foot 7)

Yes they are

Guardian blog.

Football geek porn


What have been the tactical lessons of World Cup 2010?

Spain have adopted the Barcelona formula, which seems to be the way club football is going

This has been the tournament of 4-2-3-1. The move has been apparent in club football for some time; in fact, it may be that 4-2-3-1 is beginning to be supplanted by variants of 4-3-3 at club level, but international football these days lags behind the club game, and this tournament has confirmed the trend that began to emerge at Euro 2008. Even Michael Owen seems to have noticed, which is surely the tipping point.

Formations, though, are one thing, their employment something else, and what has been noticeable in South Africa has been the vast range of 4-2-3-1s. Spain, when they finally adopted it against Germany, and stopped trying to squeeze Fernando Torres and David Villa into the same side, fiddled with the line of three, pulling Xavi back and pushing Andrés Iniesta and Pedro forward so it almost becomes 4-2-1-3, which seems to be the route club football is taking. It has had very attacking full-backs and has pressed high up the pitch, essentially using the Barcelona formula.

There are those who protest at their lack of goals (no side has reached the final scoring fewer) but they are a classic example of a team that prefers to control the game than to become obsessed by creating chances. Perhaps they at times become mesmerised by their passing, perhaps there is even something attritional about it, wearing opponents down until they make the mistake, but it is beautiful attrition. Those who have protested at the modern Holland, and their supposed betrayal of the heritage of Total Football, which is being painted as the ne plus ultra of attacking football, should perhaps look back at the European Cup finals of 1971-73 when Ajax expressed their mastery by holding the ball for long periods. Frankly, if they ever faced a side who took them on rather than sitting eight men behind the ball, we may see a more overtly attacking Spain.

Which brings us to Germany. They too play a 4-2-3-1 and, although Philipp Lahm breaks forward occasionally, theirs is essentially a defensive set-up. Here again goals are the great betrayers; it was bewildering how much praise was heaped on their supposedly fresh, open approach just because they scored four goals in three games. This Germany was superb on the counterattack, and the interaction of the front four of Miroslav Klose, Thomas Müller, Lukas Podolski and Mesut Ozil was at times breathtaking. But this was reactive football.

In three games, Germany scored an early first goal – against Argentina and England, it was essentially handed to them – and in those games they ruthlessly took advantage of the space opponents left behind them as they chased an equaliser. England, Argentina and Australia all defended idiotically against them, and were severely punished. In the other three games, teams defended decently against them and the early goal didn't arrive surrounded by watercress on a silver salver. In those games Germany managed one goal, and that a wonder-strike from Ozil. Against Spain their poverty of ideas was such they ended up sending the lumbering centre-back Per Mertesacker forward as an auxiliary striker, an idea so bereft of subtlety that the only time I remember it working was when Dennis Smith once sent Gary Bennett forward for Sunderland against Oxford in 1990.

Reactivity, in fact, has been a feature of this World Cup, which is one of the reasons the proactivity of Spain is so welcome. It's probably too early to highlight it as a definite trend, for the world seemed headed in a similar direction in 2004 when José Mourinho's Porto won the Champions League and Greece won the European Championship, only for attacking football to return the next season, but with Mourinho's success with Inter, it may be that the great creative boom of the past decade is drawing to a close.

Holland and Argentina both effectively played broken teams, the former in a 4-2-3-1, the latter in a 4-3-1-2. Certain players were clearly designated to defend, others to attack, with very little to link them. The allure of the approach is understandable, for with the limited time available to managers it is difficult to develop sophisticated systems (Spain benefit from the fact that so many of their players play for the same club, and that they have essentially played the same way, with minor evolution, for four years), and simplification is desirable.

It can be effective, and the way Nigel de Jong and Mark van Bommel have protected Holland's shaky back four has been admirable, but it can render a team static and reliant on the ability of a couple of individuals (Arjen Robben and Wesley Sneijder; Lionel Messi and Carlos Tevez). And if the forwards do no tracking back at all the system can very easily be unsettled by a breaker from midfield, as for instance Bastian Schweinsteiger showed against Argentina.

Even Brazil had an element of reactivity about them, often sitting deep, pressing only when the opponent had crossed halfway, and then hitting the space behind them. They played an angled 4-2-3-1 that had the advantage of getting Robinho into an area other 4-2-3-1s found difficult to counteract. Although they capitulated miserably in the second half against Holland, and although they have an utter disregard for the samba stereotype, they have been arguably the strongest side in the world over the past four years, winning the Copa América, the Confederations Cup and finishing top of Conmebol qualifying. That they and Spain never met feels like one of the great missed games.

Then there was Ghana's 4-2-3-1, with the five midfielders packed deep and Asamoah Gyan the lonest of lone strikers, only in bursts breaking free with the sort of passing that suggests they might actually be a force in years to come. Japan played a 4-2-3-1 with a false nine, almost embracing their historical lack of midfield flair (and no, two free-kicks, brilliant as they were, plus a goal on the break against Denmark doesn't suddenly make them a creative force, even if Keisuke Honda offers great hope for the future).

The rise of 4-2-3-1 has had knock-on effects. Attacking full-backs have become rarer – and the difference in attitude of the respective pairs of full-back is arguably the major difference between the two 4-2-3-1s that will meet in the final. It had seemed that the advance of lone-central-striker systems would spell the end for three at the back, for who needed two spare men? Well, it turns out that teams intent merely on surviving, playing for goalless draws, do, and that's what Uruguay did against France, North Korea did against Brazil, and New Zealand did on a regular basis.

Again, that suggests a preparedness to absorb pressure that it's hard to believe wasn't in some way, if not inspired then at least encouraged, by Inter's success in Barcelona. There was evidence that a technically inferior side could, though discipline and industry, endure a prolonged assault. It is that same battle between proactivity and reactivity that will be fought on Sunday; and for once, it is the Dutch who find themselves cast as the destructive force

Hmmm..... this article is a bit polite. Football isn't going this way, it's been this way for years. We're just catching up on the British Isles.

I love how they glorify Inter's performances against Barcelona as the turning point inspired by Mourinho.

They conveniently forget that in the midst of (one of) the worst refereeing performances in history that Chelsea did the exact same to a better Barcelona side under Guus Hiddink a year earlier.

And the formation thing is true,British(club) football is just starting to catch up.

It's about 7 years since I used 442 in FM  ;)

Agree, but it goes back even further tbh.

Look at some of the Milan sides who have won it - 2003/2007. Valencia finalled twice in a row by playing the best destructive football I can ever remember seeing. Sides who have won it? Porto. Liverpool. Dortmund. Juve's 3 finals in a row in the 90's. None of these were through great football but excellent coahces (Ancelotti, Cuper, Mourinho, BEnitez, Hitzfeld, Lippi) who were masters at organising themselves against better sides throughout the tournament.

Far worse than this article is how Sky Sports try to make out every season like Sam Allardyce is the Messiah who invented it in England. Give me a break.

Even ED can see what's wrong with English footie now;

The World Cup reminded us that good football does not stop at the white cliffs of Dover.

It issued a sobering reminder that success is a matter of hard work, teamwork and technique, not tabloid column inches and flashy TV ads.

We were taught a much-needed lesson in humility - maybe our national game is not all we believe it to be.

And now that South Africa 2010 is out of the way, we can forget about all that misery and get back to the BEST LEAGUE IN THE WORLD!!

Who cares if Wayne Rooney flopped on the High Veld when we can see him run riot at the Hawthorns?

Who needs the World Cup when we can watch a competition in which sloppy defending and tactical anarchy are positively encouraged?

Much like Carlsberg's claim to have the probably the best generic continental lager in the world, the Premier League's oft-repeated boast cannot be categorically disproven, even if everybody knows it isn't really true.

In any case, while the 'Best in the world' argument might matter when trying to conquer new, far-flung markets, it hardly matters on a domestic level.

Of course the Premier League needs to be entertaining, but if it isn't quite as good as the Bundesliga? Well, fans are hardly going to defect en masse to Eintracht Frankfurt or Bayer Leverkusen.

As the arrivals of Yaya Toure and David Silva ensure that Gareth Barry and Shaun Wright-Phillips need never see the light of day in a Manchester City shirt again, the debate is bound to reopen about whether a thriving Premier League actually hurts England.

It is one of the more perverse arguments against the internationalisation of the Premier League.

There are valid reasons why a foreigner-heavy league might not be altogether good for the national game, but when it comes to England's World Cup chances it makes no difference.

The pool of English players the national manager has to choose from might be smaller than in previous years - say, 80 instead of 200 - but the 120 who have fallen by the wayside never had a chance of getting picked anyway.

The 80 who play are the best 80.

Realistically there can be no more than 50 players at any one time who have a hope of getting picked for England.

And if it is ever the case that fewer than 50 Englishmen are able to get a game in their own country's top flight, that will just mean that English footballers are rubbish.

Those England players that are not regulars for their club, like Barry and Wright-Phillips, need only drop down to a more realistic level to earn first-team football.

In the last 20 years, four of Europe's 'big five' leagues have produced a World Cup win. Guess who is the exception?

Spain, Italy, France and Germany all have large numbers of foreign players in their domestic leagues.

But all four have realised tough competition for places at club level means you have to pay more attention to nurturing local talent, not less.

There are only so many clubs who can afford to hoover up the flashiest foreign talent. For the rest, their best chance of getting a top-class player is by producing one themselves.

And their FAs contribute significantly to the development of young players. Ours preferred to spend a billion quid on a jumped-up concert venue instead of the National Football Centre at Burton which should finally be completed in 2012 - a decade later than it might have been and 25 years after the French built Clairefontaine.

In any case, the quality of the team is more important than the quality of the players. Had things panned out slightly differently on Sunday night, Andre Ooijer, Khalid Boulahrouz and Edson Braafheid would now be in possession of World Cup winners' medals. Something to think about when people say we cannot possibly win when Glen Johnson is our best right-back.

england up to 7th in the fifa rankings published today, presumably due to italy and france dropping to 11th and 21st

no, scrap that. france were already below us. we've gone above portugal and italy with uruguay going past the other way

yeah, the rankings are a joke

Heskey the first one to retire. Always liked him and think he served us well. He'll always be remembered for that night in Munich. 5-1 even Heskey scored.

Kevin Davies in latest England squad.
No Andy Carroll in U21's or Main squad because he refused to meet up with U21's to have his injury assessed last match. The U21 physio is the Newcastle physio so would have been travelling to be assesed by the man that had ruled he wasn't fit in the first place.

please tell me he`s picked darren bent

Yezzir

Bentistuta Roonaldo Crouchaldinho Daviesebio are the strikers