England Thread

[Mike.]

The so called 'Golden Generation' that has been one of the worst performance wise in recent English National r=team history outside of one tournament on hime soil.

I know what your trying to say, it just always amuses me when they get called that when they failed to live upto the mantle.

They didnt fail at all, they were badly handled and still took us to 3 QFs. Where we havent been since.

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

They didnt fail at all, they were badly handled and still took us to 3 QFs. Where we havent been since.

Matter of opinion. If they where that 'golden', quarter final's should be the minimum expected.

 

[Mike.]

Matter of opinion. If they where that 'golden', quarter final's should be the minimum expected.

You need the tactical nous to go with the quality. We never played then to their best. Football isnt about sticking abuch of great players out there and letting them get on with it

 

[Scouseinthehouse]

You need the tactical nous to go with the quality. We never played then to their best. Football isnt about sticking abuch of great players out there and letting them get on with it

No ****. But it's still a failure from all concerned when they get hyped up to that lofty status and don't win anything IMHO.

Regardless of who's to blame or not, they never lived up to the mantle they should of and underachieved.

The English 'Golden Generation' ..... who continued the woefully poor English National team tournament record.

The current Belgium group is getting hyped the same. And the chances are they'll be remembered the same too. In large part down to Wilmots. But also down to the attitude of individuals. But regardless, if they don't at the least reach semi's/ finals, let alone not bring back silverware; all concerned will of failed to live upto the hype there too.

 

[Mike.]

No ****. But it's still a failure from all concerned when they get hyped up to that lofty status and don't win anything IMHO.

Regardless of who's to blame or not, they never lived up to the mantle they should of and underachieved.

The English 'Golden Generation' ..... who continued the woefully poor English National team tournament record.

The current Belgium group is getting hyped the same. And the chances are they'll be remembered the same too. In large part down to Wilmots. But also down to the attitude of individuals. But regardless, if they don't at the least reach semi's/ finals, let alone not bring back silverware; all concerned will of failed to live upto the hype there too.

you say no ****, but didnt grasp that. You say they failed when its largely not even on them. Especially for a term coined about them they had no choice about.

Awful logic to blame them for hype they had no control over. I'm out.

 

[0Marty]

But it doesn't matter whose fault is it. They simply didn't live up to the expectations, so they shouln't be called golden generation just because they were successful at their club. And I don't see Scouse blaming them, just stating the term is illogical, and I agree.

 

[Tyton]

Jesus Christ, guys, this is stupidiest debate I've seen around here. There are Golden Generations in every country that couldn't win anything.

Czechs in the early 2000s, which was arguably best team in the world for a while, but had bad luck of hitting their peak inbetween the World Cups, and losing Euro semis to Greece.

Dutch in the 70s. Dutch in the 90s. Dutch in the 2000s. Basically always bar Euro 88.

Argentina in about last 5 years - look at the players they have. Some of the best defenders in the world, arguably best holding midfield with Biglia and Mascherano, insane attacking talent with best player in history - and still nada.

And I could go on and on. Our own golden generation in Poland in the 70s got ****** by weather and the referee who allowed playing in it, otherwise they'd probably make it to WC final. This is football, there's no such thing as guaranteed success.

 

[Mike.]

But it doesn't matter whose fault is it. They simply didn't live up to the expectations, so they shouln't be called golden generation just because they were successful at their club. And I don't see Scouse blaming them, just stating the term is illogical, and I agree.

Well yeah it does matter. complaining a side doesnt live up to wild hype and overblown and near unreachable expectations that they had no control over is stupid.

 

[epic terrorist]

I have just finished reading a book called soccernomics and it actually touches on the golden generation and the fact of if they underachieved. They constructed a formula based on many things off the top of my head, population, players available, amount of games, players playing abroad, win ratio, and other stuff which i cannot remember because i am just finishing a night shift. Anyways the long and short of it was that once this formula was applied and the maths worked out that England actually overachieve. They also suggested teams that are more successful have higher percentage of players playing abroad in less intense leagues, bigger national pool, less games etc. I am not saying it is correct but it was interesting nonetheless and changed my view on things.

 

[Tyton]

I have just finished reading a book called soccernomics and it actually touches on the golden generation and the fact of if they underachieved. They constructed a formula based on many things off the top of my head, population, players available, amount of games, players playing abroad, win ratio, and other stuff which i cannot remember because i am just finishing a night shift. Anyways the long and short of it was that once this formula was applied and the maths worked out that England actually overachieve. They also suggested teams that are more successful have higher percentage of players playing abroad in less intense leagues, bigger national pool, less games etc. I am not saying it is correct but it was interesting nonetheless and changed my view on things.

How would you define intensity exactly? Bundesliga is at least as fast as the Prem, and they've won a thing or two.

Similarily, Italian league maybe used to be slower paced, but 80s/90s Serie A was arguably the most competetive league to ever exist, so there was far more tough games to play. There's a reason why so many Italian legends played to their very late 30s, and why some are even still playing. They simply take better care of themselves, because you had to be ultra-professional tu survive Serie A in its peak.

Meanwhile in England, a night in the pub after every training was still a thing.

 

[sunilvk7]

Even though England won 8/8 games their performance was just average or below.

Milner in the midfield just sums up the England performance. No creativity at all and it's all about just running.

Apart from Smalling and Shaw, none of them did anything good. Kane was lively though.

 

[Subtle]

The stupidest thing is we could actually be a rather good team if we played to our strengths. We have lots of high intensity, high workrate players and decent amounts of pace, so with a modern manager you'd expect to see us set us as a team that presses relentlessly and counters with speed.

 

[sunilvk7]

The stupidest thing is we could actually be a rather good team if we played to our strengths. We have lots of high intensity, high workrate players and decent amounts of pace, so with a modern manager you'd expect to see us set us as a team that presses relentlessly and counters with speed.

Yeah, England do have excellent players to set up to play counter attacking football. Sterling, Ox, Walcott have pace to burn but England do lack proper DM though.

 

[Subtle]

Yeah, England do have excellent players to set up to play counter attacking football. Sterling, Ox, Walcott have pace to burn but England do lack proper DM though.

Sturridge too, if he ever becomes fit again/Liverpool ever let England near him.

You're right, DM is a big problem atm, but we can somewhat compensate by running 4-3-3 with 3 hardworking midfielders constantly harrying. The problem is that Hodgson is inevitably going to fall into the old England trap of playing his best players, not his best team, and will end up starting Rooney and Kane together, probably in a 4-2-3-1 with Rooney in the 10 position.

 

[sunilvk7]

Sturridge too, if he ever becomes fit again/Liverpool ever let England near him.

You're right, DM is a big problem atm, but we can somewhat compensate by running 4-3-3 with 3 hardworking midfielders constantly harrying. The problem is that Hodgson is inevitably going to fall into the old England trap of playing his best players, not his best team, and will end up starting Rooney and Kane together, probably in a 4-2-3-1 with Rooney in the 10 position.

Starting Rooney and Kane together would't be a problem if Rooney should play as Rooney is used to playing with striker all his career but not setting up team properly and going by media hype was always biggest obstacle for England NT.

Also forgot about Sturridge. England have good young players but maybe wrong manager.

 

[epic terrorist]

How would you define intensity exactly? Bundesliga is at least as fast as the Prem, and they've won a thing or two.

Similarily, Italian league maybe used to be slower paced, but 80s/90s Serie A was arguably the most competetive league to ever exist, so there was far more tough games to play. There's a reason why so many Italian legends played to their very late 30s, and why some are even still playing. They simply take better care of themselves, because you had to be ultra-professional tu survive Serie A in its peak.

Meanwhile in England, a night in the pub after every training was still a thing.

I have been up 36 hours after a night shift and a school run so forgive me if I am unclear, when I say intensity I am pretty sure they used stat's from prozone or whoever and I also mean like fixture congestion/lack of winter break. And I seem to recall hen they said less intense leagues it wasn't specifically saying the prem is more intense than say serie A, but it is more intense then say Croatia who given size of the league etc have overachieved (world cup 98). But Intensity is not the only thing it compares.

I cannot check proper because my Ipad is ****** (zoom in and out/open apps by itself). But there was a multitude of things that was quantified, down to youth coaches, qualified coaches, Domestic transfers, exports etc etc Basically anything that can be quantified, And it is not just some guy on a white I would assume SPSS or something similar aand probably some kind of mass factor analysis. It is an excellent read, do not agree with it all because there is some really good stuff in it.

 

[Chelski Shogun]

So who would you guys name in England's 23-man squad for the Euro's? Taking injuries out of the equation I'd pick...

GK: Hart, Forster, Butland.
DF: Clyne, Walker, Cahill, Smalling, Jagielka, Stones, Shaw, Baines.
MF: Carrick, Henderson, Milner, Wilshere, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Walcott, Barkley, Sterling.
ST: Rooney, Welbeck, Sturridge, Kane.

Backup/injury list:

Foster, Jones, Shelvey, Lallana, Berahino.

 

[sunilvk7]

So who would you guys name in England's 23-man squad for the Euro's? Taking injuries out of the equation I'd pick...

GK: Hart, Forster, Butland.
DF: Clyne, Walker, Cahill, Smalling, Jagielka, Stones, Shaw, Baines.
MF: Carrick, Henderson, Milner, Wilshere, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Walcott, Barkley, Sterling.
ST: Rooney, Welbeck, Sturridge, Kane.

Backup/injury list:

Foster, Jones, Shelvey, Lallana, Berahino.

I'm sure Jones will be in the main squad. He is one of Hodgson's pet.

 

[Subtle]

Starting Rooney and Kane together would't be a problem if Rooney should play as Rooney is used to playing with striker all his career but not setting up team properly and going by media hype was always biggest obstacle for England NT.

Also forgot about Sturridge. England have good young players but maybe wrong manager.

That's why I think Rooney and Kane together is currently a mistake. If we had a good holding midfielder then it would work, but if we play any combination of Henderson/Shelvey/Milner/Barkley/Wilshere in the pivot I think we'll get destroyed through the middle.

 

[Subtle]

So who would you guys name in England's 23-man squad for the Euro's? Taking injuries out of the equation I'd pick...

GK: Hart, Forster, Butland.
DF: Clyne, Walker, Cahill, Smalling, Jagielka, Stones, Shaw, Baines.
MF: Carrick, Henderson, Milner, Wilshere, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Walcott, Barkley, Sterling.
ST: Rooney, Welbeck, Sturridge, Kane.

Backup/injury list:

Foster, Jones, Shelvey, Lallana, Berahino.

Shelvey/Lallana (if he's on form for Liverpool) in over Walcott imo. We already have pace upfront and on the wing, and he doesn't offer a whole lot more.