What went wrong with England?

First topic message reminder :

How has our WC turned into such a nightmare?

I believe not having Ashley Cole in the squad left us with no alternatives to Baines who has looked poor all tournament.

The central defence looked very poor. Jagielka is just not good enough at this level and also he was coming back from injury. I believe JT should have been in the squad.

Tactical decisions cost us. At half-time when we were 1-1 with Italy why not substitute Rooney for Milner who offers more protection on the flank? It was so obvious Italy if they did score, and they did would make it happen down rooney's wing as he just was not protecting Baines.

Why did steven gerrard play the full 90mins in both games?? he hasn't got the legs to do that and we really could have used someone like OX or Wilshire coming on.

I also think it was a horrible decision to play sterling on the wing in the 2nd game so that we could accomodate rooney in the middle. Sterling was the best layer on the pitch in the first game behind the striker so why move him? It cost us against Uruguay as Sterling looked poor on the wing.

Things do not look good for the England national team for Euro 2016 as we look to have gone backwards.

A loss to Costa Rica would mean 3 defeats in 3 games and would signal just how bad we are.

I'm still confused as to why anything went wrong when it was widely expected England would fail to get out of the group.

Yes GSC, those people do rather amuse me.

One other thing, I don't know a single person who thinks that the EPL is the best league in the world because of the English players, let alone advancing this as a reason for why England should expect to do well at major tournaments. Yet there are many people all over cyberspace who debunk this nonexistent theory; like CaledonianCraig did earlier in this thread.

Who are these people that think the EPL is the best in the world, or near to it, because of English players?

GSC wrote:I'm still confused as to why anything went wrong when it was widely expected England would fail to get out of the group.

That's only because people thought Uruguay and Italy would be good. As it was they were pretty rubbish too, and Costa Rica won the group. You can't tell me England weren't expected to beat Costa Rica.

Riggs wrote:Are the beeb right in this article or just producing the usual bs again: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28295153

Read this earlier and there are some good points but you need your own structure. You can't just copy another league or country as all countries are different.

I agree on some points like we need more top level coaches. Uefa coaching courses cost far more in this country than they do on the continent. I also agree that we need to look at what we are coaching kids. We need to look more towards skill and technique, playing in different positions and basic tactics. By that I mean keeping shape, movement, making runs, when to stay or go, spreading out when you have the ball, being compact when you don;'t etc.

westisbest wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:I think Phil Neville is right. We need to keep the top flight foreigners[b]...but get rid of all the lower standard journeymen foreigners. These should be replaced by young English lads

Bang on there.

i agree but only when the young English players are better. We already say they are too spoilt with big wages and now people want to guarantee them starting places. They have it made for doing nothing.

sportform wrote:

westisbest wrote:

GeordieFalcon wrote:I think Phil Neville is right. We need to keep the top flight foreigners[b]...but get rid of all the lower standard journeymen foreigners. These should be replaced by young English lads

Bang on there.

i agree but only when the young English players are better. We already say they are too spoilt with big wages and now people want to guarantee them starting places. They have it made for doing nothing.

Should change come then it'll be a huge shock to their system. But maybe that's what they need.
I want to see them proving themselves on a consistent basis..................................but will that happen? I doubt it.
I am interested in developments being made so I tend to check the fa.com, is there anywhere else I should check?? Do make suggestions??

Ultimately it comes down to the question of whether we want the Premier League to be the league of international all stars, or a means of preparing English (or more broadly British and Irish) players for international football.

Given that all club owners and the large majority of fans see club as more important than country, and the players (enormous) salaries come through the clubs and the TV deals in place for the EPL, I don't see where the motivation for change will come from.

The FA can do some things, like ensuring top quality coaching and better talent identification amongst kids i.e. picking the ones who are most skilled and tactically aware rather than the lad who is 6 foot and 13 stone at age 12 who dominates youth football through size and strength but is unlikely to work on technique and tactics until too late when the physical advantages are lost as the other kids catch up. However, with the EPL structure as it currently stands, there is no defined pathway for this young talent to be given early opportunities in the Premier League.

I learnt on the radio yesterday that German clubs, with only one or two historic exceptions, have to be owned by a supporters trust - this means that there is much greater positive interaction between the clubs and the German FA, so when the Germans wanted to rebuild the national team in the early 00s it was possible to put into place a structure amongst their top league teams to facilitate this.

As an aside, the Beeb had an article up a couple of days ago about the 2009 Euro U21 final teams - obviously the Germans have developed well and had iirc 6 of the starting 11 from that team in their WC squad. England had Milner, although that is slightly misleading, as Walcott would have been in the WC squad bar injury and Hart missed the U21 final through suspension. Of the others, Micah Richards and Adam Johnson have been capped but have failed to make the progress expected from their early promise. Gibbs, Cattermole and Noble are solid EPL pros and Muamba was well on his way to that level before his health issues. Nedum Onuoha remains on Chelsea's books but has been loaned out to Sunderland and QPR, where he hasn't exactly set the world on fire, while Scott Loach and Martin Cranie are starters at Championship level.

The German U21 team was better than ours in 2009, so it is no surprise that they have gone on to greater achievement than our guys, but the gap is perhaps not as much of a yawning chasm as some have tried to portray

One key difference lies in the make-up of the Bundesliga compared to the EPL.

The vast majority of their teams are made up of German players. Even the champions Bayern Munich have a first team squad made up of 50% German players most of whom are first team regulars and German internationals. Look at EPL champions Manchester City and their first team squad is currently made up of only around 30% of English players and fewer of them are first team regulars and fewer are England internationals. Dig deeper and I am highly confident you will get the same stats.

Let's not claim it's all down to make up.
I can't think of one English player who would get near the German one. So even if the EPL was 100% English players, they still wouldn't be as good as Germany

Think your missing the point SR, if we taught the youngsters better and they were given more of a chance to play top class pro football then realistically we should produce better youngsters. Unfortunately this doesn't always equate on the national side and I'm not sure at this point in time that it would make that much of a difference due to our approach to training.

I do think Germany will have a lull period in their production and you'll find more foreigners bought. Hell, Barca and Real are not exactly going Spanish right now because their production isn't as world class as before.

....but on the other hand, we keep saying how there are plenty youngsters playing top class football (and that we've got great youngsters coming through, golden generation etc), and they are in the England team, but that they don't have any incentive to do well due to being paid so much. (as if youngsters in other international teams aren't paid just as well)

We can't have it both ways.

It's not a question of "What went wrong with England" as clearly nothing went wrong, it should be "How many reasons/contributing factors can you give as to why England are so bad?"

CaledonianCraig wrote:One key difference lies in the make-up of the Bundesliga compared to the EPL.

The vast majority of their teams are made up of German players. Even the champions Bayern Munich have a first team squad made up of 50% German players most of whom are first team regulars and German internationals. Look at EPL champions Manchester City and their first team squad is currently made up of only around 30% of English players and fewer of them are first team regulars and fewer are England internationals. Dig deeper and I am highly confident you will get the same stats.

While I think there are too many foreigners in the PL, I don't think this can be blamed for England's recent failing. Go back two decades and prior, the PL was almost entirely made up of English players yet the national team still struggled to make impacts at major tournaments. Its not like England were a dominating team and only declined since the rise of foreigners in the PL.
Besides, if players are good enough, they will make the first team of their respective clubs. The reason why Bayern and Dortmund have plenty of Germans in their squads is because those players are good enough to represent them.

Well the last really good run England had in tournaments was the 1990 World Cup and the home Euros in 1996 just prior to a vast influx of foreigners and since then it has been all downhill. Coincidence? Well I'd say not as the same happened in Scotland in the early to mid-1990's when Rangers began buying foreign and other big clubs followed suit - the last time Scotland qualified for a major tournament? A few years later in 1998. There is a definite pattern there.

No there isn't.

England didn't even qualify in 94.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well the last really good run England had in tournaments was the 1990 World Cup and the home Euros in 1996 just prior to a vast influx of foreigners and since then it has been all downhill. Coincidence? Well I'd say not as the same happened in Scotland in the early to mid-1990's when Rangers began buying foreign and other big clubs followed suit - the last time Scotland qualified for a major tournament? A few years later in 1998. There is a definite pattern there.

The influx was only denied because of the European ban on English clubs and there was a large contingent of Scottish and Irish players anyway which as far as international football goes are foreign.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well the last really good run England had in tournaments was the 1990 World Cup and the home Euros in 1996 just prior to a vast influx of foreigners and since then it has been all downhill. Coincidence? Well I'd say not as the same happened in Scotland in the early to mid-1990's when Rangers began buying foreign and other big clubs followed suit - the last time Scotland qualified for a major tournament? A few years later in 1998. There is a definite pattern there.

And the 70s were perhaps, with the exception of the 1970 World Cup, the worst decade for the English national team since the win in 66. How many foreigners were in the English First Division then?

there are foreigners in all leagues, the issue is that young foreign talent move abroad to gain experience and catapult them into their 1st teams but young English talent are happy to remain on the bench.

Yes the 70's were a poor decade for the England national side and yes the international influx was still nowhere near. However, the 'foreign element' was still there in the terms of Scottish, Irish and Welsh players. Look at Liverpool with Dalglish, Souness, Hansen, Toshack and Forest with O'Neill, Gemmill and Robertson etc. So 'foreigners' were there then in bigger numbers from the home nations more so than now owing to the worldwide foreigners.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:there are foreigners in all leagues, the issue is that young foreign talent move abroad to gain experience and catapult them into their 1st teams but young English talent are happy to remain on the bench.

Yes there are but look at the Bundesliga - it has a much higher proportion of German players in their sides than there is in the EPL. Also look at La Liga and would guess that the Spanish element is strong as well and the same goes for Italy and France.

I would like to believe in a theory of:

More foreigners in the Premier League = Increased competition for places = Extra motivation for our English players = Ability and competitiveness vastly increased.

Of course, just like privatisation, the theory rarely equals the result!

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:there are foreigners in all leagues, the issue is that young foreign talent move abroad to gain experience and catapult them into their 1st teams but young English talent are happy to remain on the bench.

Yes there are but look at the Bundesliga - it has a much higher proportion of German players in their sides than there is in the EPL. Also look at La Liga and would guess that the Spanish element is strong as well and the same goes for Italy and France.

But a lot of those Spanish players went abroad eg Pique, Alonso, Torres, Costa, Azpilecueta, Fabregas, Cazorla etc etc

It seems that foreign players are more willing to go abroad to get 1st team experience and improve whilst English layers would happily sit on a subs bench eg sinclair etc etc

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:there are foreigners in all leagues, the issue is that young foreign talent move abroad to gain experience and catapult them into their 1st teams but young English talent are happy to remain on the bench.

Yes there are but look at the Bundesliga - it has a much higher proportion of German players in their sides than there is in the EPL. Also look at La Liga and would guess that the Spanish element is strong as well and the same goes for Italy and France.

But a lot of those Spanish players went abroad eg Pique, Alonso, Torres, Costa, Azpilecueta, Fabregas, Cazorla etc etc

It seems that foreign players are more willing to go abroad to get 1st team experience and improve whilst English layers would happily sit on a subs bench eg sinclair etc etc

Yes, of course, there is that as well. But again does that not come about from perceived greatness of the EPL as in players believe (wrongly) that it is the only and best place to be?

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:there are foreigners in all leagues, the issue is that young foreign talent move abroad to gain experience and catapult them into their 1st teams but young English talent are happy to remain on the bench.

Yes there are but look at the Bundesliga - it has a much higher proportion of German players in their sides than there is in the EPL. Also look at La Liga and would guess that the Spanish element is strong as well and the same goes for Italy and France.

Look at the Swedish, Danish, Croatian, Russian, Greek, Czech and Portuguese leagues, not exactly full of foreigners, yet not exactly ripping it up at tournaments are they? Those are teams on a par with England, so simply saying that England have a lot of foreigners in their leagues isn't an argument when teams that are in their peer group don't have lots of foreigners in their leagues either. Pretty sure the Argentine and Brazilian leagues aren't full of foreigners either, so it isn't even true for teams better than England either.

England are undeniably a second tier nation, and it's rare for a nation in that bracket to do well in tournaments, certainly making a connection between England and proper tournament challengers like Germany, Spain, Argentina etc is the first mistake when considering the question.

Nothing went wrong with England, it's just their level. Can they improve? Yes, will they, probably not.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:It seems that foreign players are more willing to go abroad to get 1st team experience and improve whilst English layers would happily sit on a subs bench eg sinclair etc etc

Foreign players aren't going abroad to get first team experience, the very young ones go for the money or because they think they're the next big thing, the rest goes once they've already got some first team experience at home, because English clubs don't want to risk developing their own players. The problem for English players is that the Premier League is the destination league for most of the world and there isn't really a league for young players to develop in that the top teams are watching.

Lowlandbrit wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:It seems that foreign players are more willing to go abroad to get 1st team experience and improve whilst English layers would happily sit on a subs bench eg sinclair etc etc

Foreign players aren't going abroad to get first team experience, the very young ones go for the money or because they think they're the next big thing, the rest goes once they've already got some first team experience at home, because English clubs don't want to risk developing their own players. The problem for English players is that the Premier League is the destination league for most of the world and there isn't really a league for young players to develop in that the top teams are watching.  

All the best players are in Spain,
There are some excellent players in England, but all the absolute best ones go to Spain, whilst Germany also has some of the best players. England, is simply one of the better leagues in Europe, but clearly not the best.

It's true the very best players are in Spain, but the amount of money all the way through the Premier League means players from all over the world are happy to go to a mid table team in England, much more than they are for similar teams in Italy, Spain or Germany. Which means those teams aren't playing their own young players, limiting the chances to break through and eventually reach the top.

I doubt even if it were different it would make any different to England's chances. They've never been one of the top teams, even when they didn't have such a high proportion of Johnny Foreigners in their ranks.

England have a long history of being a second tier nation.

super_realist wrote:I doubt even if it were different it would make any different to England's chances. They've never been one of the top teams, even when they didn't have such a high proportion of Johnny Foreigners in their ranks.

England have a long history of being a second tier nation.

Even when we were World Champions?

MIG wrote:

super_realist wrote:I doubt even if it were different it would make any different to England's chances. They've never been one of the top teams, even when they didn't have such a high proportion of Johnny Foreigners in their ranks.

England have a long history of being a second tier nation.

Even when we were World Champions?

How long ago was that? and at a time when only 8 teams were in it.

That's one of England's major failings. They won it once, so think they ought to be a team that is worthy of contending, where in fact their tournament average since the 1970's is last 16.
So 2014 wasn't a failure at all, it was just slightly less than average. If they had got to last 8, would people be questioning what went right?

Depends who you are SR.

Nobody should have expected us to do brilliantly this tournament in fact I'm sure the FA stated that getting out of the group stages would be a good success. Obviously we didn't expect to only get a point but them's the breaks sometimes.

As much as it pains me to say it, at this time the rankings show we are currently a second tier National team, to get back to the upper echelons there needs to be a big overhauling of the training we're giving our young kids.

The pro footballers are getting the best advice and training they've ever had so it can't really be laid at club footballs door (although the influx of average foreign players hasn't helped (although buy 1 average English player or 4 average - good foreginers).

Grass roots needs looking at properly with the FA/Premier League and councils pumping a bit of money into it.

16 teams were present at 1966, actually.

I stand corrected Duty.

Derby, I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the rankings, the rankings often don't reflect who is the best, remember England were ranked third just a couple of years ago, so I don't really think England are any worse as a 20th ranked team than when they were 12th,  weren't Switzerland 7th recently too? I doubt anyone would ever make a claim that Switzerland were ever the 7th best team. Badly designed ranking system in all fairness.

There are always going to be a small and select number of nations capable of winning tournaments, England not being amongst them by a long way and generally their ranking is irrelevant.
Sadly for England fans, they are very much a second tier nation (and everybody accepts that, so it's nothing new), and there is no shame in being second tier, there are some decent teams that are second tier, and no shame in having a tournament average of last 16.

It's England's level, simple as that, doesn't make them easier to support, and doesn't stop fans wishing for that miraculous result which might present another QF.

Furthermore, for every improvement England might make, every other country above and around them is doing the same or more, England would need to put in 3x the amount of effort, training, tactics, fitness etc to even get up one solitary notch, and I think the progress and development of other teams in conjunction with any improvements England make is why they appear to stand still, or even go backwards.
For that reason, England's continued ordinariness, isn't necessarily due to them not improving, simply that every other team better than them is improving in parallel.

super_realist wrote:

MIG wrote:

super_realist wrote:I doubt even if it were different it would make any different to England's chances. They've never been one of the top teams, even when they didn't have such a high proportion of Johnny Foreigners in their ranks.

England have a long history of being a second tier nation.

Even when we were World Champions?

How long ago was that? and at a time when only 8 teams were in it.

That's one of England's major failings. They won it once, so think they ought to be a team that is worthy of contending, where in fact their tournament average since the 1970's is last 16.
So 2014 wasn't a failure at all, it was just slightly less than average. If they had got to last 8, would people be questioning what went right?

Doesn't really matter how long ago it was, thats not the point, you said never.
And it was 16 teams not 8.
I'm not arguing with any of your other points as I don't disagree.

So what team starts the 1st Euro qualifier?


What do people think about the defence? I think we're missing a beast...an Adams, or a Butcher or a Keown.

Im not 100% with Cahill but he has the potential.
Is Jones going to make it?
Stones at Everton?

Sturridge will surely play, as will Gerrard. Barkley not mature enough. Wilshire and Rodwell not good enough. Baines will be left back. Cahill, Jagielka and Johnson will still be there.

Can't see Hodgson going for an entirely new side for he qualifiers - the risk of not qualifying is too great, got to be evolution of the campaign - not revolution initially.

The Euro qualification squad will be almost identical to the WC one. Walcott may be brought in if he's fit by then.

That doesnt inspire me a whole lot guys.

No inspiration, no hope, nothing at all tbh. Whoever plays for England will be pushed aside easily so there's no real competition. England will be very easy to knockout.

Can I ask Super Realist why the only contribution you make on the football board is to talk negatively about the English national team?

Henderson, arguably in England's top 2 players in the World Cup, is not going to be dropped any time soon.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Henderson, arguably in England's top 2 players in the World Cup, is not going to be dropped any time soon.

Say's it all. Bleak.

Well Gerrard and Lampard have both gone so time for the Youngsters to step up.

Im not convinced Henderson is what is needed however he's proving himself with Liverpool...ill give the guy credit for that. See how he goes this season.

But i really hope we mix it up for the Euro Qualifiers. We have the chance to break the mould of the boring traditional England with some cracking players coming through with pace and skill...lets give them a chance.

Hodgson is not the man to do that though. He shouldnt be there for the qualifieres.