Why do England suck?

N o o d l e s

Registered User
Jul 17, 2010
15,364
7,056
South Shore
I feel like the youth of this England team is going to propel them going forward. That said, the defense is poor. They need to figure out a way to develop a better CB tandem, though. I was really surprised Stones couldn't get in the team.
 

Mount Suribachi

Registered User
Nov 15, 2013
4,247
1,052
England
Someone mentioned Scholes in the other thread as the best English player of the last 20 years. He is, unquestionably, the most technically gifted English footballer I have seen in my 43 years.

And what did we do with him? Stick him at left midfield, and play Gerard, Lampard, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all ahead of him at CM. And then wonder why he retired early from international football.

England do not, and never have, valued the ball enough at international level. They'll play it around for 5 or 10 passes, but then someone can't resist trying a 50 yard pass that gives away possession 95% of the time (Steven Gerrard, I'm looking in your direction). Doesn't matter in the EPL, you'll get the ball back in 30 seconds. At international level you might not see it for another 2 or 3 minutes.
 
Jul 26, 2007
2,088
226
Vermont
I'm glad there's been actual constructive feedback on this thread, rather than either blind English denial or everyone else with the "lol England" stuff.

Someone mentioned Scholes in the other thread as the best English player of the last 20 years. He is, unquestionably, the most technically gifted English footballer I have seen in my 43 years.

And what did we do with him? Stick him at left midfield, and play Gerard, Lampard, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all ahead of him at CM. And then wonder why he retired early from international football.

England do not, and never have, valued the ball enough at international level. They'll play it around for 5 or 10 passes, but then someone can't resist trying a 50 yard pass that gives away possession 95% of the time (Steven Gerrard, I'm looking in your direction). Doesn't matter in the EPL, you'll get the ball back in 30 seconds. At international level you might not see it for another 2 or 3 minutes.

The misuse of Scholes made me shake my head every time I'd see him line up in an England shirt. I feel like our coaches would stick Buffon at centre back since he's tall and can jump.
 

Venkman

Registered User
Jun 28, 2007
2,608
473
England
Lack of quality coaches at youth level. We have thousands less than the top nations. Lack of technical and tactical development. Small players are released from academies and big, strong or quick players aren't developed technically.

If we had a decent manager with the current team, the quarter finals are our level. But if we actually want to compete for trophies then the fundamentals need to change. Like Germany after Euro 2000. This article is a good read.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/may/23/germany-bust-boom-talent
 

The Examiner

Registered User
Jun 24, 2013
6,525
1,940
Lack of quality coaches at youth level. We have thousands less than the top nations. Lack of technical and tactical development. Small players are released from academies and big, strong or quick players aren't developed technically.

If we had a decent manager with the current team, the quarter finals are our level. But if we actually want to compete for trophies then the fundamentals need to change. Like Germany after Euro 2000. This article is a good read.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/may/23/germany-bust-boom-talent

This pretty much nails their problem. I listen to Talk Sport a lot and one of the biggest problems seems to be that it's very, very expensive to obtain your coaching license(s). If this is indeed the case, the FA needs to make it easier/cheaper for people to get involved.
 

Evilo

Registered User
Mar 17, 2002
61,958
8,526
France
Deschamps, as much as I don't like him, is one of the top french coaches. We lack quality coaches in France.
We have Blanc, Deschamps, Garcia, Wenger and Gourcuff. Others are either too new to judge or just plain crap.
 

PeteWorrell

[...]
Aug 31, 2006
4,627
1,730
It is interesting that the nation that claims to have created the game is hardly a force in it currently or historically internationally. Does make you wonder.
They don't get that other nations perfected the game by creating and adjusting to a certain style of play.

It's embarrassing when you see such a big nation go in a major tournament with their players not even knowing what they're supposed to do.
 

Edo

The Mightiest Club
Jun 7, 2003
6,036
69
vancouver
wowhockey.com
England has the best "MARKETED" league in the world. Nobody on England would start on Germany. Even at striker, where I'd rather have Muller than any of the English options.

England is not that talented.

Germany brought Schweinsteiger, Podoloski, Gomez, and a few other guys that might not have made the English squad.

England's team is easily top 10 worldwide. Hodgson and their FA are terrible.

Iceland got lucky. Whoop-dee-doo. You play that game 100 times and England win 85-90 of those games. Would Germany, Italy, France, or Belgium absolutely wrecked them?
 

Ivan94

Registered User
Jun 1, 2013
532
0
Germany
Germany brought Schweinsteiger, Podoloski, Gomez, and a few other guys that might not have made the English squad.

England's team is easily top 10 worldwide. Hodgson and their FA are terrible.

Iceland got lucky. Whoop-dee-doo. You play that game 100 times and England win 85-90 of those games. Would Germany, Italy, France, or Belgium absolutely wrecked them?


The only reason Podolski was called up is to have a good atmosphere off the pitch. Schweinsteiger because he is the captain. You need such guys to fill up the squad. If you call up the theoretically 23 best players you do something wrong.
 

jniklast

Registered User
Sep 28, 2007
6,139
191
Germany brought Schweinsteiger, Podoloski, Gomez, and a few other guys that might not have made the English squad.

England's team is easily top 10 worldwide. Hodgson and their FA are terrible.

Iceland got lucky. Whoop-dee-doo. You play that game 100 times and England win 85-90 of those games. Would Germany, Italy, France, or Belgium absolutely wrecked them?

It's true that Germany brought at least a couple of players that shouldn't be there, but they are mostly just squad players. On the other hand, at least 5 players in the German squad are amongst the very best in their position world wide (Neuer, Boateng, Kroos, Özil, Müller and Hummels, when on form), while I'd probably not rank a single English player as that right now. So that's half a team of world class players that England lack in comparison.

Iverall I'd say easily top-10 is stretching it, but I'd agree that England are at ~10 in the world.

But what really sets them apart from the other nations you named is that they regularly bottle it and just don't perform at the big tournaments. Six won knockout games after 1966 is laughable, Germany have 34 in the same timeframe and I'd guess Italy isn't that far off either.

And sure, Iceland scoring those two goals was maybe lucky (although the bad defending by England did its part), but afterwards I wouldn't call their victory lucky. It's not like England missed sitter after sitter or Iceland were saved by the woodwork multiple times. England created a couple of decent shots before halftime but pretty much nothing afterwards. That was just pathetic.
 

LOFIN

Registered User
Sep 16, 2011
13,425
18,033
Germany brought Schweinsteiger, Podoloski, Gomez, and a few other guys that might not have made the English squad.
All those 3 would have made the English squad much better, because they have experience and leadership. Something that everyone in the English squad lacked.
 

Evilo

Registered User
Mar 17, 2002
61,958
8,526
France
Southgate has apparently refused the position (I mean really Southgate???), but Blanc is a possibility.
I'm skeptical he goes to a NT. He seems like a club coach to me.
 

Suiteness

Registered User
Mar 14, 2003
8,782
705
Time to Rebuild
Visit site
Iceland got lucky. Whoop-dee-doo. You play that game 100 times and England win 85-90 of those games. Would Germany, Italy, France, or Belgium absolutely wrecked them?

Did you actually watch the game? England scored from a penalty and hardly never threatened for the rest of the match. That's the most shocking thing about the result, England were hands down the second best team in that match (or the first worst if you like). From the display put forth by both teams, Iceland wins the match 100 times out of a 100.
 

firewagonHOCKEY

Registered User
Mar 7, 2006
985
58
Belgium
Italy, Germany, Spain all have their unique way of playing football. The players know it and when they join the NT they know how the NT plays football and how they are expected to play in their position.

There is an "English" way to play but most coaches seem to try and get away from it.

Play 4-4-2 , play with lots of crosses from fullbacks and be aggressive in the midfield.

Play English football.
 

HajdukSplit

Registered User
Nov 9, 2005
11,035
762
NJ
Jurgen is now the betting favorite in the UK to get the job

I read he is "intrigued" by the job but would he really want to leave California and the relative comfort of the USNT, he's practically got the job until the 2018 World Cup. I'm sure also England won't be thrilled with having a manager who will be living outside the country for 90% of the football season, I think when he managed Germany he still lived in the US? I don't think Klinsmann is going anywhere until he is under contract by the USSF

And then again, Klinsmann has been linked to 2-3 jobs in the Premier League where supposedly he was the favorite as well and it was revealed that he was never contacted :laugh:
 

Deutschland Dangler

Registered User
Jun 17, 2014
4,182
200
[...] that's why they're so reluctant to sacrifice immediate results for long-term success.

What immediate results would they be sacrificing?

As to the topic, they have the most insanely overblown hype machine in the world and they usually believe that hype. I think that's pretty much it.
 

Siamese Dream

Registered User
Feb 5, 2011
75,215
1,238
United Britain of Great Kingdom
I have always thought England were a good side who could beat anyone on their day but they aren't consistent and crack under pressure, often the players just do not turn up for the national team and play like they do for their clubs, and the managers always just seem to plonk the best players on the pitch together without building a team and a game plan around certain players.
 

Evilo

Registered User
Mar 17, 2002
61,958
8,526
France
What about Puel?
Puel is pretty good with underdogs teams. He has an insane will to win (very similar to Simeone in that regard).
He's also absolutely great at developping young players.

But we've seen him with a big team (Lyon). He doesn't get the job done with star players. He doesn't get the job done when his team has to break up defensive teams.
 

Pouchkine

Registered User
May 20, 2015
2,731
294
In terms of results at big tournaments England comes about #8 in Europe.

Germany 4WC 3EURO
Italy 4WC 1EURO
Spain 1WC 3EURO
France 1WC 2EURO
Holland 0WC 1EURO 3Finals 6Semis
Ussr 0WC 1EURO 3Finals 3Semis
Czech 0WC 1EURO 3Finals 1Semis

So when you look at it England with their one title at home and zero other big final they are in the group just above Greece and Denmark...

They once had a very good team but since about 20 years they are not a threat and since 10 years they are a big overrated joke like a guy ranked #15 in tennis who the media would have you believe is a favorite for slams...When you look at all time great players you don't see many english ones as well...I don't care about the reasons, their players are not good enough they play a boring unskilled game with bad coaching. Yeah something like the Maple Leafs!
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->