England Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter iNickStuff
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 4K
  • Views Views 377K
CJACKO11 said:
He said Terry drags his team mates down with him but that is purely not the case. If anything when he's backed into a corner he normally comes out fighting and it makes him more determined.
Click to expand...

I'm merely explaining why the notion "Terry has to go because he is a leader" is completely false.

First, the whole concept of a "leader" is rather odd, these people are adult professionals, they don't need daddy to hold their hands. You do need organisers on the field but many people can do that.

Secondly, i don't know what you do for a living, but in any kind of workplace you'll eventually run into person in a leadership position who is a complete ****. Since you're expected to behave professionaly and need to earn monies for that next FM edition, you have to get along with them. But if the same person shows up at private BBQ and still acts in this manner, nobody cares what they have to say , no matter how much they talk and how much chest thumping they do. If this metaphore is somehow unclear, Chelsea is a workplace, BBQ is England team , and Terry is a ****.

Last but not least, what does it matter if Center Back is determined or not. Lets say you have two CBs who are not determined and give up easily. What are they going to do, lie down and stop defending? I can see how it matters for strikers or midfield or maybe even full backs. CB? Not really. Anyone who made it up this level is already determined enough.

I get what you are trying to say, but you're using some artificial concepts that don't even apply to real world half the time. Passion, determination, leadership? Terry is not a warrior from World of Warcraft, he's a guy running in tight shorts for a living.
 
Tyton said:
I'm merely explaining why the notion "Terry has to go because he is a leader" is completely false.

First, the whole concept of a "leader" is rather odd, these people are adult professionals, they don't need daddy to hold their hands. You do need organisers on the field but many people can do that.

Secondly, i don't know what you do for a living, but in any kind of workplace you'll eventually run into person in a leadership position who is a complete ****. Since you're expected to behave professionaly and need to earn monies for that next FM edition, you have to get along with them. But if the same person shows up at private BBQ and still acts in this manner, nobody cares what they have to say , no matter how much they talk and how much chest thumping they do. If this metaphore is somehow unclear, Chelsea is a workplace, BBQ is England team , and Terry is a ****.

Last but not least, what does it matter if Center Back is determined or not. Lets say you have two CBs who are not determined and give up easily. What are they going to do, lie down and stop defending? I can see how it matters for strikers or midfield or maybe even full backs. CB? Not really. Anyone who made it up this level is already determined enough.

I get what you are trying to say, but you're using some artificial concepts that don't even apply to real world half the time. Passion, determination, leadership? Terry is not a warrior from World of Warcraft, he's a guy running in tight shorts for a living.
Click to expand...

I am using concepts that apply to football because the game of football is not the real world. I am not saying take him because of his leadership skills I am saying take him because he is still one of the best defenders in the world game.
 
eeugh. Just got back from work to read this., So disappointed in Roy, who I thought would make a good selection. How Carrick, Richards and Jagielka aren't picked is confusing, but not nearly as confusing as the inclusion of Downing and Carroll, as well as Henderson on standby. Honestly, wtf does Henderson offer that Carrick doesn't?! I also think Lennon is entitled to be a bit disappointed.

Would rather have included Crouch or even Holt over Carroll- presumably Roy has been swayed by Carroll improving form recently. Even so it's a terrible call IMO. Any optimism I had about this tournament has all but evaporated for now. Maybe I'll feel better in a while when the dust settles and I realise I'm over reacting. It's just hard to fathom what Roy was thinking when he made some of those decisions. I imagine our team, such as it is, will line up:
------------Hart-------------
Johnson-Cahill-Lescott--Cole
-------Parker--Barry------
Walcott---Gerrard---Young
----------Welbeck---------

With Rooney to replace Gerrard when eligible. It's still a good team and has a chance of progressing from the group. It's just not as strong as it could have been. This is all assuming we line up with 4-2-3-1. If Roy does go with 4-4-2 we can say goodnight before a ball is kicked, but I'm hoping he will have learnt the lessons of 2010.
 
Last edited:
From what I've seen of Hodgson said, it seems that he had not even approached Carrick about it. And I don't really buy his words, this is the same guy who said Oxlade impressed against Pirlo (in Juve) and Amborisini (did not played) when Arsenal played against Milan.
 
alicwkd said:
Euro 2012 Focus: England Squad Selection

Good article by WhoScored about the selections.
Click to expand...

This is something I was talking about on Michael ***'s Guardian article the other day shortly after I shat out about 4 pages of stats (here if you're interested). Statistics have to be contextualised by other factors like common sense. Football is not designed to be analysed by a statistical system so it's hard to come up with a set of parameters that can properly define things. Players like Aguero and Torres have gotten some bad ratings in games from Whoscored despite being the most dangerous player on the pitch and changing the game with their presence.

Case in point, Gibbs over Cole? Sure if you look purely at the stats- even though Cole is higher in every key area- it might make sense but that completely fails to take into account why Cole has struggled this season. It's the one thing that really annoys me about that otherwise excellent website.
 
CJACKO11 said:
And apparently John Terry's attitude it poor, i really thought higher of Carrick i really did.
Click to expand...

Its based on the way he has been handled for the past 2 years. Englands best central mid at the moment, and people still cant tell that. He said he would be available if there was ever an injury crisis, but he didnt want to be messed about. If Roy cant tell that he is better than Barry, then God help us.

As if you can compare the way Carrick handles himself to the way Terry does...
 
Mike. said:
Its based on the way he has been handled for the past 2 years. Englands best central mid at the moment, and people still cant tell that. He said he would be available if there was ever an injury crisis, but he didnt want to be messed about. If Roy cant tell that he is better than Barry, then God help us.

As if you can compare the way Carrick handles himself to the way Terry does...
Click to expand...

The difference is who is Carrick to decide he is the best central midfielder and "deserves" to start for England??
 
CJACKO11 said:
The difference is who is Carrick to decide he is the best central midfielder and "deserves" to start for England??
Click to expand...
He never said any of that, or decided that. He merely said that he didnt want to be messed about as a bit part player, as he has been. And as he said if there was ever a crisis, he would make himself available. Its basically Scholes all over again.Carrick is England's best midfielder though.
 
Last edited:
Mike. said:
He never said any of that, or decided that. He merely said that he didnt want to be messed about as a bit part player, as he has been. And as he said if there was ever a crisis, he would make himself available. Its basically Scholes all over again.Carrick is England's best midfielder though.
Click to expand...

That all depends on what type of midfielder you want, a passer of the ball then yes maybe so. Carrick does for Utd what Mikel does for Chelsea, when things are going well he gets noticed but when things aren't he is the one that stands out and looks worse than anyone else. I personally think Carrick is hugely over hyped.
 
Comparing Mikel; an anti footballer to Carrick is ridiculous. He's much closer to Pirlo or late career Scholes in terms of playing style, admittedly without quite so much class, but to compare him to Mikel, is pretty insulting.
 
CJACKO11 said:
That all depends on what type of midfielder you want, a passer of the ball then yes maybe so. Carrick does for Utd what Mikel does for Chelsea, when things are going well he gets noticed but when things aren't he is the one that stands out and looks worse than anyone else. I personally think Carrick is hugely over hyped.
Click to expand...

Bullshit, Mikel is a completely limited passing player to Carrick. Oh my good god I cannot believe you compared the two. Carrick is a regista, not a short simple passer. He excels in the long raking pass to the wingers, he is in the mould of (but not as good as) Xabi Alonso. The only english passer with a better range is Paul Scholes. And what do you mean if you need a passer? You always need a passer of the ball.
 
Mike. said:
Bullshit, Mikel is a completely limited passing player to Carrick. Oh my good god I cannot believe you compared the two. Carrick is a regista, not a short simple passer. He excels in the long raking pass to the wingers, he is in the mould of (but not as good as) Xabi Alonso. The only english passer with a better range is Paul Scholes. And what do you mean if you need a passer? You always need a passer of the ball.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Did you forget Lampard's passing ability?
 
BlueHeart26 said:
Wrong. Did you forget Lampard's passing ability?
Click to expand...

Carrick outstrips him. Lampard hasnt even got Gerrards range. Its why Lampards isnt a regista, its why Chelsea actually want a regista. So not wrong in the slightest.
 
Mike. said:
Carrick outstrips him. Lampard hasnt even got Gerrards range. Its why Lampards isnt a regista, its why Chelsea actually want a regista. So not wrong in the slightest.
Click to expand...

Never said Lampard was regista. But his passing range is quite good, from simple short passes to long range passes. Gerrard's range? Please Mike.
 
BlueHeart26 said:
Never said Lampard was regista. But his passing range is quite good, from simple short passes to long range passes. Gerrard's range? Please Mike.
Click to expand...

Still isnt anywhere near Carricks. And yeah Gerrard has a better range, but poor accuracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Back
Top