F.A define the future of English football
Discussion
Like every other group then, but we still outperformed most 'power houses' in Europe in our qualification. The fact is we have been a penalty shoot out away from having numerous successful tournaments in recent times. We've only been taken apart once in recent tournaments and even then you never know how it would have gone if Lampard's goal was given to make it 2-2 at HT v Germany.
Boydie88 said:
Like every other group then, but we still outperformed most 'power houses' in Europe in our qualification. The fact is we have been a penalty shoot out away from having numerous successful tournaments in recent times. We've only been taken apart once in recent tournaments and even then you never know how it would have gone if Lampard's goal was given to make it 2-2 at HT v Germany.
The fact is we haven't been close to winning it for over 20 years, So is winning it the outcome considered successful? 20 years is 10 competitions.
96 semi final, penalties against winners.
98 last 16, penalties.
00 'group of death'
02 quarters, losing to winners.
04 quarters, penalties.
06 quarters, penalties.
08 failed to qualify - FAILURE
10 last 16, vs germany as we failed to win 'easy' group - FAILURE
12 quarters, penalties.
50% of the last 10 tournaments have been down to penalty defeats and only once in those 10 tournaments were we outclassed and even that could have been different due to a goal not given.
You mention power houses as if we can't compete yet you only consider victory as succes, that's part of the problem.
96 semi final, penalties against winners.
98 last 16, penalties.
00 'group of death'
02 quarters, losing to winners.
04 quarters, penalties.
06 quarters, penalties.
08 failed to qualify - FAILURE
10 last 16, vs germany as we failed to win 'easy' group - FAILURE
12 quarters, penalties.
50% of the last 10 tournaments have been down to penalty defeats and only once in those 10 tournaments were we outclassed and even that could have been different due to a goal not given.
You mention power houses as if we can't compete yet you only consider victory as succes, that's part of the problem.
WolfyJones said:
86 and 90 teams were rather good, it's been downhill after 90,
No they weren't.86, lost to a poor Portugal side, drew with the mighty Morocco, beat Poland, beat the mighty Paraguay, went out to Argentina and only started playing for the last 15 mins. 5 games, s
t in 3 of them.If you want proof of how bad we were, then just remember Terry Fenwick played in a world cup quarter final. That's how poor our squad was.
90, rubbish against Ireland, good against Holland, rubbish against Egypt, outplayed by Belgium, 6 minutes from going out and crap against Cameroon and unlucky not to beat Germany. 6 games, crap in 4 of them.
The 82 world cup was ok, played 5, won 3, drew 2, 1 goal conceded. If Keegan had been fit then who knows.
But please...enough of the Italia 90 rose coloured specs mythology. We were the worst side ever to fluke our way to a world cup semi.
Boydie88 said:
We've only been taken apart once in recent tournaments and even then you never know how it would have gone if Lampard's goal was given to make it 2-2 at HT v Germany.
I know how it would have gone. The Germans would have gone in at half time furious that they were level having totally outplayed us for 40 minutes, and they would have come out in the second half and destroyed us. We would have lost 5 or 6-2.BECAUSE WE WERE CRAP.
Why not just copy the Southampton system (I am a Saints fan) In the last few years, Saints have produced Bridge(OK maybe not quite good enough), Walcott, Oxlade Chamberlin, Bale, Shaw, Lallana and have some more coming through (Chambers, Targett etc) Saints have also produced a number of others. Not all of the above would walk into an England team, but if every Premier league club produced 2 similar quality every 10 years, then we would have a team. Yes I know Bale is Welsh and yes not all of those I named would be England regulars, but the point is that 3-4 clubs have systems which have worked for years.
I caveat this with the fact that it is much easier to get into a Saints team than a Man city or Chelsea, but why not look at the coaching techniques, the education etc and revise the system based on what works...... unless of course the FA think that Saints have just been lucky to produce 4/5 England quality players in the past 5 years.
The jiffle king said:
Why not just copy the Southampton system (I am a Saints fan) In the last few years, Saints have produced Bridge(OK maybe not quite good enough), Walcott, Oxlade Chamberlin, Bale, Shaw, Lallana and have some more coming through (Chambers, Targett etc) Saints have also produced a number of others. Not all of the above would walk into an England team, but if every Premier league club produced 2 similar quality every 10 years, then we would have a team. Yes I know Bale is Welsh and yes not all of those I named would be England regulars, but the point is that 3-4 clubs have systems which have worked for years.
I caveat this with the fact that it is much easier to get into a Saints team than a Man city or Chelsea, but why not look at the coaching techniques, the education etc and revise the system based on what works...... unless of course the FA think that Saints have just been lucky to produce 4/5 England quality players in the past 5 years.
And before that Le Saux, Le Tissier and Shearer.I caveat this with the fact that it is much easier to get into a Saints team than a Man city or Chelsea, but why not look at the coaching techniques, the education etc and revise the system based on what works...... unless of course the FA think that Saints have just been lucky to produce 4/5 England quality players in the past 5 years.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff