Parker 'named England captain'

[IanC]

Not really, its just my view point. If he wasnt wearing would Parker shrink from his role? You've seen him playing all year so you know the answer would be no. The armband doesn't make him some leader, he has that naturally. He doesnt need an armband to be influential. So the whole debate on giving it to him is moot.

Think back to the last world cup. Where were the leaders Terry, Gerrard etc. They shrunk from their roles. So yes it is an integral part of someone who can lead as the managers right hand man on the pitch. All the great teams in the past have had at least a captain who can lead and when the chips are down gee up those around him. So yes it is important. As I said before there is no use debating with you Mike. as you always want to be right.

 

[zzeezzy]

I think Scotty Parker is a top professional and he fully deserves to wear the band in tonights friendly and maybe beyond.

More interestingly I am sure this choice had some influence from Harry Redknapp.

 

[GodCubed]

This debate on the captaincy is utterly ridiculous. Literally no other team in the entire world cares about it as much as we do. The Spanish have picked Iker Casillas and the French Hugo Lloris. Nobody would call them typical leaders, but they're integral to their side and one of, if not the best players. The Germans have Philipp Lahm, not a leader, but their most senior regular player.

It's just ridiculous. Give the captaincy to an experienced first team regular and be done with it. Nobody cares if they're 'inspirational' or 'have leadership qualities' because off the pitch, where all the duties of the captain REALLY are, it doesn't matter. ON the pitch, anyone can lead. You think not having a small strip of fabric around his arm is going to stop Steven Gerrard from charging around the pitch and leading from the front? Rubbish.

Parker would be my choice. He's arguably THE safest member of the outfield unit at the mo, and he's experienced and a nice lad. He's also a favourite of the media, which means he'll get less exposed and give him more chance to just focus on his football.

 

[GodCubed]

Think back to the last world cup. Where were the leaders Terry, Gerrard etc. They shrunk from their roles. So yes it is an integral part of someone who can lead as the managers right hand man on the pitch. All the great teams in the past have had at least a captain who can lead and when the chips are down gee up those around him. So yes it is important. As I said before there is no use debating with you Mike. as you always want to be right.

But that's ridiculous. We all know John Terry is an absolute beast of a leader. If he can't use the myth of the important captain's armband, who can? We need a team of 11 leaders. Frankly, if a player can't motivate themselves to play for their country at some of the biggest stages in the world, they don't deserve to be picked.

And stop whining. Mike. knows when he's wrong (pretty often, when he's talking to me ) and he admits it. Thing is though, in this case he just isn't wrong at all.

 

[Mike.]

This debate on the captaincy is utterly ridiculous. Literally no other team in the entire world cares about it as much as we do. The Spanish have picked Iker Casillas and the French Hugo Lloris. Nobody would call them typical leaders, but they're integral to their side and one of, if not the best players. The Germans have Philipp Lahm, not a leader, but their most senior regular player.

It's just ridiculous. Give the captaincy to an experienced first team regular and be done with it. Nobody cares if they're 'inspirational' or 'have leadership qualities' because off the pitch, where all the duties of the captain REALLY are, it doesn't matter. ON the pitch, anyone can lead. You think not having a small strip of fabric around his arm is going to stop Steven Gerrard from charging around the pitch and leading from the front? Rubbish.

Parker would be my choice. He's arguably THE safest member of the outfield unit at the mo, and he's experienced and a nice lad. He's also a favourite of the media, which means he'll get less exposed and give him more chance to just focus on his football.

Indeed with Lahm, you could just as easily give it to Bastian and it would make **** all difference. Evra captains our side, makes no difference to Rio Ferdinand doing his job

 

[Dunc]

It's a quite one dimensional view to say 'the captaincy doesn't matter, the media should be looking at tactics'. 90% of England are retarded, they won't understand most of the tactics used in football, which would lead to the media to swerve away from mass reporting on tactics, as it wouldn't sell papers or get people to visit your website as much as reporting on something which is much more trivial. At the end of the day, the captaincy change is still 'news', the tactics 'news' are all pretty much educated guess work, rather than something based on fact. If Pearce came out and said 'We are playing 4-1-2-2-1 with wingers cutting inside, Gerrard and Lampard in the middle with Parker playing behind', then yes, that would be news, but he hasn't (of which I know), so the tactics will be as speculative as they have been since the team has announced, so if anything, the captaincy is much more news worthy than tactics and analysis.

Either way, happy with Parker as captain.

 

[Joel`]

Meaningless sentiment. /care

 

[IanC]

This debate on the captaincy is utterly ridiculous. Literally no other team in the entire world cares about it as much as we do. The Spanish have picked Iker Casillas and the French Hugo Lloris. Nobody would call them typical leaders, but they're integral to their side and one of, if not the best players. The Germans have Philipp Lahm, not a leader, but their most senior regular player.

It's just ridiculous. Give the captaincy to an experienced first team regular and be done with it. Nobody cares if they're 'inspirational' or 'have leadership qualities' because off the pitch, where all the duties of the captain REALLY are, it doesn't matter. ON the pitch, anyone can lead. You think not having a small strip of fabric around his arm is going to stop Steven Gerrard from charging around the pitch and leading from the front? Rubbish.

Parker would be my choice. He's arguably THE safest member of the outfield unit at the mo, and he's experienced and a nice lad. He's also a favourite of the media, which means he'll get less exposed and give him more chance to just focus on his football.

Godcubed has to back Mike. up as well all the time. How predictable. Tell you what how about no-one ever expresses an opinion on here again. You would be bored.

 

[GodCubed]

It's a quite one dimensional view to say 'the captaincy doesn't matter, the media should be looking at tactics'. 90% of England are retarded, they won't understand most of the tactics used in football, which would lead to the media to swerve away from mass reporting on tactics, as it wouldn't sell papers or get people to visit your website as much as reporting on something which is much more trivial. At the end of the day, the captaincy change is still 'news', the tactics 'news' are all pretty much educated guess work, rather than something based on fact. If Pearce came out and said 'We are playing 4-1-2-2-1 with wingers cutting inside, Gerrard and Lampard in the middle with Parker playing behind', then yes, that would be news, but he hasn't (of which I know), so the tactics will be as speculative as they have been since the team has announced, so if anything, the captaincy is much more news worthy than tactics and analysis.

Either way, happy with Parker as captain.

Unfortunately, exactly right. I'd much rather see a two-page spread on the different formations England could use and their repercussions, but I'd imagine the majority want to see a two-page spread on England captaincy in the Euros.

 

[Joel`]

Godcubed has to back Mike. up as well all the time. How predictable. Tell you what how about no-one ever expresses an opinion on here again. You would be bored.

You've never seen them argue? Look harder.

Maybe they just share opinions on a lot of stuff. Herp derp.

 

[GodCubed]

Godcubed has to back Mike. up as well all the time. How predictable. Tell you what how about no-one ever expresses an opinion on here again. You would be bored.

...are you twelve?

I 'back him up' because he's right, not because of some weird conspiracy. I'm not telling you you can't have an opinion; you can have an opinion no matter how retarded it is, I don't care, but I'm going to debate it with you if the opportunity arises in the correct thread.

 

[Mike.]

It's a quite one dimensional view to say 'the captaincy doesn't matter, the media should be looking at tactics'. 90% of England are retarded, they won't understand most of the tactics used in football, which would lead to the media to swerve away from mass reporting on tactics, as it wouldn't sell papers or get people to visit your website as much as reporting on something which is much more trivial. At the end of the day, the captaincy change is still 'news', the tactics 'news' are all pretty much educated guess work, rather than something based on fact. If Pearce came out and said 'We are playing 4-1-2-2-1 with wingers cutting inside, Gerrard and Lampard in the middle with Parker playing behind', then yes, that would be news, but he hasn't (of which I know), so the tactics will be as speculative as they have been since the team has announced, so if anything, the captaincy is much more news worthy than tactics and analysis.

Either way, happy with Parker as captain.

Its a slightly different point, but speculation hasnt stopped the media before, In the same way they have speculated on Harry getting the job, what pearce can bring, etc, why cant they speculate who kind of approaches. Agree what you are saying though, it'd be nice for something different for a change

 

[Dunc]

Unfortunately, exactly right. I'd much rather see a two-page spread on the different formations England could use and their repercussions, but I'd imagine the majority want to see a two-page spread on England captaincy in the Euros.

I suppose it also depends on what papers/websites you visit. I imagine a paper like 'The Sun' would well do a 2 page spread on the captaincy situation, while I imagine most broadsheet papers would have much less coverage on the captaincy, leaning towards likely tactics and starting line ups.

 

[IanC]

My opinion was it is still an integral part of who can stand up and be counted and lead a side. It is still important. He still has to guide players on a pitch as the Managers right hand man. **** then lets do away with captains altogether as you lot seem not to think we need them. Write to FIFA so they can get the strip of fabric abolished. Jeez..

 

[zzeezzy]

Who is gonna be vice-captain? trololol

 

[GodCubed]

My opinion was it is still an integral part of who can stand up and be counted and lead a side. It is still important. He still has to guide players on a pitch as the Managers right hand man. **** then lets do away with captains altogether as you lot seem not to think we need them. Write to FIFA so they can get the strip of fabric abolished. Jeez..

Actually, yes, great idea. Or seeing as we need someone to do the ceremonial duties before and after the match, why not rotate it between players?

 

[Dunc]

Its a slightly different point, but speculation hasnt stopped the media before, In the same way they have speculated on Harry getting the job, what pearce can bring, etc, why cant they speculate who kind of approaches. Agree what you are saying though, it'd be nice for something different for a change

I'm not saying they can't speculate, but rather that the captaincy situation is still 'news' (although it is massively over hyped), so should still be reported. Some people care about that kind of stuff, some people don't. I'm not all that fussed, but I can still appreciate that some people are fussed and want to read about it.

 

[Mike.]

I'm not saying they can't speculate, but rather that the captaincy situation is still 'news' (although it is massively over hyped), so should still be reported. Some people care about that kind of stuff, some people don't. I'm not all that fussed, but I can still appreciate that some people are fussed and want to read about it.

I agree, i'd just like to see some semblance of balance.

 

[IanC]

Actually, yes, great idea. Or seeing as we need someone to do the ceremonial duties before and after the match, why not rotate it between players?

If you think that is a great idea then I'm sorry to think you know very little about leadership on a pitch. The same goes for every team sport you need someone out there to lead by example and get the best out of others around you. Might as well give it to someone like Welbeck if thats your opinion. Very little experience and does not show he is a leader. Good player but hardly the type to get the best out of others.

 

[GodCubed]

If you think that is a great idea then I'm sorry to think you know very little about leadership on a pitch. The same goes for every team sport you need someone out there to lead by example and get the best out of others around you. Might as well give it to someone like Welbeck if thats your opinion. Very little experience and does not show he is a leader. Good player but hardly the type to get the best out of others.

And since when does a strip of fabric make you a better or worse leader, or mark you out as a designated one? Gerrard and Rooney and Parker will all still lead by example, strip of fabric or not. They'll get the best out of others, strip of fabric or not. In fact, I'd say it would be a much better idea to reduce the significance of the captaincy in this regard. What if you captain doesn't inspire, if for example you make the wrong choice? Then the entire team will be without leaders and directionless, by your views. If we didn't care about the captaincy, then everyone would strive to be a leader themselves.

The captain's role is treated by -literally- every other country in the world as ceremonial. We still have some archaic view about it being important, much like we cling on to our outdated love of a rigid 4-4-2. We need to modernise, and we can begin by not caring about the captaincy as much as we do now.