World Cup Draw

First topic message reminder :

Live on BBC 2 at 16:30 GMT. Here are the pots:

Pot 1 (top eight seeds): Brazil, Spain, Argentina, Belgium, Colombia, Germany, Switzerland, Uruguay.

Pot 2: Ivory Coast, Ghana, Algeria, Nigeria, Cameroon, Chile, Ecuador.

Pot 3: Japan, Iran, South Korea, Australia, United States, Mexico, Costa Rica, Honduras.

Pot 4: Bosnia-Hercegovina, Croatia, England, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, France.

One team from Pot 4 will move into Pot 2.

England's hardest possible group: Brazil, England, United States, Netherlands (or maybe Italy)...it could happen!
England's easiest possible group: Switzerland, Nigeria, Honduras, England.

I've got my fingers crossed that we get the Argentines!

mystiroakey wrote:Walcott is a striker end of story.

He has amazing goals to shots ratio.

That is where he will play for arsenal when he comes back I am pretty show of that.

Well apart from a short run last season, he has played almost exclusively on the wing for his entire career.

I think that he should be a striker, but neither of the managers who choose where he plays agrees with us so he's a winger. He's certainly not going to be the starting striker for England at the World Cup.

Problem with walcott as a striker is he's easy to defend against. Sit deep and dont allow space in behind and thats his main weapon gone. He will get alot more space out wide

Crimey wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:Walcott is a striker end of story.

He has amazing goals to shots ratio.

That is where he will play for arsenal when he comes back I am pretty show of that.

Well apart from a short run last season, he has played almost exclusively on the wing for his entire career.

I think that he should be a striker, but neither of the managers who choose where he plays agrees with us so he's a winger. He's certainly not going to be the starting striker for England at the World Cup.

I agree to an extent however looking at arsenals midfield and strike force- I have a feeling there is massive chance walcott will be playing in 'his' preferred position, and if he does then he will be on the radar to play for England.

Walcott is a much better finisher than the majority of England's strikers

In all competitions last year suarez scored and assited 35 goals(30/5), walcott scored and assisted 36(21/15) goals in less time on the pitch.

I really don't want Walcott to start at the world cup. Always horrific for England.

Walcott for England. Run, run, run, run, head down and then two outcomes. Either runs it out of play or passes to the opposition.

This.

John wrote:Walcott for England. Run, run, run, run, head down and then two outcomes. Either runs it out of play or passes to the opposition.

I disagree, I think you are talking about the Walcott of two years ago. I think Walcott has become an underrated crosser of the ball. He assisted a large number of Giroud's goals last year, and in two substitute appearances this year in the last two games he has assisted both Arsenal goals. I think Arsenal would be smart to play him not just because I am an Arsenal fan. His speed unsettles teams and you don't spend a few years at Arsenal and not become a decent passer, we aren't United or Liverpool we don't hoof the ball around in our games or training sessions. I also would like to see England use Barkley.

I tell you what playing Walcott on the right is a lot better than Lennon, now there is a player who can neither shoot nor pass. Walcott made a lot of good crosses last year I watched the kid play as often as I could. If you play him he will get you goals and get behind a defense.

Walcott is the most underrated English player IMO.

The odd thing is abroad he is one of the highest rated.

mystiroakey wrote:Walcott is the most underrated English player IMO.

The odd thing is abroad he is one of the highest rated.

As a neutral if I was England I would find away to play Barkley, Walcott, and Wilshere each player has the ability to unlock defenses. Enough with the retreads. And as for Walcott specifically, I think they have the failings of the teenage or younger Walcott in mind. He was a huge player for Arsenal last season at times at the end of the year he was carrying out attack. I would not play Wellbeck, Lennon, or Lampard. Those guys are not up to high international standards currently.

Since Sweden in the Euro 2012 Walcott has been utter rubbish for England. Prime example is Ukraine a few months ago, up against an average right back and he had Walcott in his back pocket. Like John said, he gets the ball, runs into a player, or runs the ball out of play all together.

For Arsenal last season though he was superb and evidently is a world class player. Just rarely see him do anything for England.

Apart from being utterly cute, Theo is also utterly talented.

He'll fill out his potential for England soon enough.

And if not Theo then who? Townsend doesn't have much experience, Milner is a bit negative, Zaha doesn't get game time, Lennon is too inconsistent.

Has to be Theo.

He has stepped up against top sides in the CL, so He isn't a flat track bully. He was also key to Arsernal getting that top 4 when the pressure was on

Townsend has been brilliant for England, but standard for club. Just needs to calm down on the amount of times he shoots, because he isn't Gareth Bale. But the way he beats his full back and his crossing is a lot better than Walcott (for England anyway)

NickisBHAFC wrote:Townsend has been brilliant for England, but standard for club. Just needs to calm down on the amount of times he shoots, because he isn't Gareth Bale. But the way he beats his full back and his crossing is a lot better than Walcott (for England anyway)

Well brilliant for England...just the once though.
And maybe for half the game against Poland.

Townsend has caused the manager head aches.

Was it just a purple patch,

Is he a rare player that can play better at international level,

Hmm i thought he was great against Montenegro, Poland and Germany myself.

Well if we're counting friendlies I thought Theo was great against Brazil (the home game).

He was ok, wouldn't use the word great at all. Think the spotlight was mainly on Jack Whilshere for that game as he was superb and bossed the game.

Not sure how Townsend has shown he is any better than Walcott. Not a chance yet. If you're gonna say Walcott doesnt have a final ball then neither does Townsend. Walcott is faster, has a better eye for goal, has experience and could cover as a striker

Walcott does indeed have all those things. But he simply never shows it for England. For Arsenal he is amazing.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Not sure how Townsend has shown he is any better than Walcott. Not a chance yet. If you're gonna say Walcott doesnt have a final ball then neither does Townsend. Walcott is faster, has a better eye for goal, has experience and could cover as a striker

I agree, Walcott has been playing at a high level for quite some time, since he was a teenager. Townsend has had a few good performances for Spurs and England in his whole career. A player who has a good month or two of football and has never done that much and he has been found out a bit in the premier league as well. Theo is a much more experienced and is just a better player. Theo has made a great leap as well in the last season or two in terms of the quality of his final ball. He simply is not this dead end for possession that he is being made out to be. Maybe for England he has not quite performed as well as he could but I think he is still pretty young and can do some work at striker as well.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Not sure how Townsend has shown he is any better than Walcott. Not a chance yet. If you're gonna say Walcott doesnt have a final ball then neither does Townsend. Walcott is faster, has a better eye for goal, has experience and could cover as a striker

Townsend is a much much worse version of Bale. Lennon has pretty much taken his spot in the spurs side in no time. Had a purple patch, but players like Redmond are doing more week in week out.

Personally would go with Theo

Agree. It was embarrassing seeing some people cream themselves over Townsend when he took apart Montenegro & an already out Poland. Yeah, he's got ability but I'd still go with Theo, in terms of counter-attacking threat, which Roy will use.

Townsend has been found out. Happens to every player who emerges & has the spotlight put on them. It's whether or not your a genuine class player, that you can overcome that spotlight, added pressure & direct marking. It started off with Newcastle actually, doubling up on Townsend with pacy Santon & Gouffran, showing him continuously onto his right foot. He was anonymous. Losing your place to Lennon is quite worrying really.

Although Walcott has improved dramatically, he still has issues, not the great footballing brain & sometime the touch of a *****, however, I'd still just side with him for Brazil.

John wrote:It started off with Newcastle actually, doubling up on Townsend with pacy Santon & Gouffran, showing him continuously onto his right foot. He was anonymous.

I think Townsend could be pretty dangerous in Rio since he is an unknown entity for most opposition. They don't know enough about him so could be unaware of how to deal with him.
Once they start to figure him out though, he would need to become less predicatable otherwise he is at risk of becoming just another Young or SWP.

Engalnd have so many right sided players with pace and a half decent delivery.

Zaha is t he future- More tricks than darren brown and a real eye for the game.

mystiroakey wrote:Walcott is the most underrated English player IMO.

The odd thing is abroad he is one of the highest rated.

Now you're making him sound like Paul Scholes!

Jeez, he's good but he ain't that special!!

who said he was special(he is a very special boy but that wasn't what was said), and he is nothing like scholes- scholes was rated high by us english.

But your comment does prove my point- you underrate him

mystiroakey wrote:Engalnd have so many right sided players with pace and a half decent delivery.

Zaha is t he future- More tricks than darren brown and a real eye for the game.

Pity one of those tricks is, quite literally, screwing his way out the United set-up!

Tragic to see dross like Young get played ahead of him......

Young will go to another club in the window..

Palace should maybe consider getting the odd man u reject

mystiroakey wrote:who said he was special(he is a very special boy but that wasn't what was said), and he is nothing like scholes- scholes was rated high by us english.

But your comment does prove my point- you underrate him

Just because I rate him less than you do does not mean I under-rate him.

He's good, very good at times, but not as exceptional as you seem to be trying to make out.

As for Scholes, he was often criminally under-rated in this country whereas some of the best players from the continent considered him the best player post-Gazza England have ever produced.

Most 'fans' -ie the majority of posters on here or half knowledgeable fans allways rated scholes.

If there was a poll and people were asked to order Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard, I wouldn't be surprised to see Scholes come third.

Maybe.

But we know why- He isnt as eye catching- You have to understand the game a bit to notice a scholes or xavi type player

mystiroakey wrote:Maybe.

But we know why- He isnt as eye catching- You have to understand the game a bit to notice a scholes or xavi type player

Scholes is not a Xavi type player he is more like a goal scoring midfielder at least for most of his career than an out and out playmaker. Xavi plays much deeper I don't see the correlation. I would rate Scholes behind Gerrard, at his best Gerrard took a very ordinary Liverpool to the Champion's league title. He is old and past it now but Gerrard at his peak could do it all in the midfield; score, pass, and tackle. I would rate Scholes as better than Lampard despite Frank's admirable goal scoring record.

Gerard is the different player. A player that has allways bee more direct in his play. Forward balls and forward runs from a deeper starting point.

Lamps and scholes at an earlier stage in there career played more in the hole, getting the ball in more advanced positions and making intricate passes. Both similar to Xavi but not up to his standard.

The BBC will have England's first group game, ITV will have 2 and 3. Then the BBC will have first pick of the last 16 and the semis, while ITV have the first choice of the quarter-final.

Makes a nice change as usually ITV have had England's first game at a major tournament, and send the hype machine into overdrive, while the BBC broadcast the glum quarter-final exit. Over way round in 2014!

Duty281 wrote:The BBC will have England's first group game, ITV will have 2 and 3. Then the BBC will have first pick of the last 16 and the semis, while ITV have the first choice of the quarter-final.

Good Luck ITV with that England QF

John wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The BBC will have England's first group game, ITV will have 2 and 3. Then the BBC will have first pick of the last 16 and the semis, while ITV have the first choice of the quarter-final.

Good Luck ITV with that England QF

Fingers crossed it'll be a corker. England against either Spain or Brazil.

No need to fret, we've got Zidane (Wilshere), Gascoigne (Barkley), and the White Pele (Rooney).

Well that's what the media will tell me anyway!

BBC should just get all the England games.

ITV sucks.

You've just got to love Clive Tyldesley and that nasally affected voice of his.

Besides which, ITV are proper pro-England, unlike the moaning Mark Lawrenson and the hyprocritical Alan Shearer.

Everything about ITV is rubbish. Also there are add breaks.

Adrian Chiles set the mood, then I remember Clive Tyldesley single-handedly capturing the spirit of a nation before the France-England game at Euro 2012, before Andy Townsend increased the patriotic fervour - on the other hand, the BBC had a rap song and a montage set to the words of Shakespeare before England-Italy, and a corking end montage set to an excellent song at the end.

Mmm...tough one.

Adrian Chiles   How the bloke is still employed is beyond me

Andy Townsend is a rubbish commentator. Whilst i do agree with you about Tyldesley and Lawrenson. BBC just is a lot lot lot better than rubbish ITV.

Adrian Chiles is a joke. But a worthwhile one for me.

The bumbling happy brit that knows little about football

It's laughable that ITV binned the excellent Steve Ryder to accommodate Chiles.

Whoever told the guy that he's funny needs locking in the special bus.