266 replies to this topic

[Ruh Buh Juh]

Randy36, on 09 July 2010 - 06:10 PM, said:

I can't see Spain conceding any more than 1 goal.

Then it's settled - Holland 1 - 0 Spain.

[Hutch]

Valerie, on 09 July 2010 - 05:59 PM, said:

I've just heard on the Dutch news that a Singapore parakeet, that's also known for its accurate predictions, has predicted a Holland win. I'm very relieved.

Although I obviously want the Dutch to win, the football fever is getting on my nerves a bit. About 16 million people can talk of nothing else. I'll be glad when it's all over and we can go back to Blue again. All this orange is starting to hurt my eyes.

i'm not sure if this will help?

[Randy36]

Ruh Buh Juh, on 08 July 2010 - 11:55 AM, said:

I pulled Spain out of the hat in my sweepstake.

Are you sure it wasn't a rabbit?

[bar24rat]

The speed and accuracy at which spain move the ball is to be admired. The problem for the majority of UK fans are that they are rarely seen and used skills . If they were then perhaps we'd be in closer contention for international trophies as countries . The majority of leading european and south american sides play in that style and they have produced the majority of the world's top players in recent years. In the UK we enjoy the more frenetic pace which, as nations, has produced no international success . We even struggled in SA against Algeria and the US.

[Randy36]

bar24rat, on 09 July 2010 - 10:16 PM, said:

The speed and accuracy at which spain move the ball is to be admired. The problem for the majority of UK fans are that they are rarely seen and used skills . If they were then perhaps we'd be in closer contention for international trophies as countries . The majority of leading european and south american sides play in that style and they have produced the majority of the world's top players in recent years. In the UK we enjoy the more frenetic pace which, as nations, has produced no international success . We even struggled in SA against Algeria and the US.

I believe England's problem is that we haven't developed our style of play. As you know, speed does not guarantee victories nor does one touch football. I was impressed that every time Spain received the ball , they slowed down the game, maintained possession and prevented Germany from getting into their rhythm. Simple and very effective. Many fans would call it "boring". I don't mean to say that England should emulate Spain. We have speed and guts but games are not won on those alone. It's up to Capello to find a Plan B or discover attributes that assure England can develop. English fans may eventually have to accept that in order for England to succeed they may have to be a little bit more "boring". So what do we want? Gutsy speed and pace or another star on our shirt!

[loz]

Gutsy speed and pace is just the start of it. Throw in

1. 'Look for the centre forward'
2. 'Be afraid of being caught in possession'
3. 'If I can pass 50 yards instead of 5 I have saved time and created a possible chance'
4. 'Controlling the ball, looking for my team mate, passing to my team mate is three very defined and seperate actions'

It doesn't help when we are cursed with people like Ian Wright who rant on the radio that England need to up their tempo, hit the wingers, get the ball in the box ASAP and play to our strengths. Which misses the point entirely that our 'strengths' are the reason we haven't been anywhere near winning the World Cup for 44 years.

[Spiller86]

loz, on 09 July 2010 - 11:35 PM, said:

Gutsy speed and pace is just the start of it. Throw in

1. 'Look for the centre forward'
2. 'Be afraid of being caught in possession'
3. 'If I can pass 50 yards instead of 5 I have saved time and created a possible chance'
4. 'Controlling the ball, looking for my team mate, passing to my team mate is three very defined and seperate actions'

It doesn't help when we are cursed with people like Ian Wright who rant on the radio that England need to up their tempo, hit the wingers, get the ball in the box ASAP and play to our strengths. Which misses the point entirely that our 'strengths' are the reason we haven't been anywhere near winning the World Cup for 44 years.

I think quick tempo football is always preferable. I am continually frustrated against poor teams when we play too slow and let teams just sit back in deep. But quick tempo football needs to be accompanied by shortish passing. Moving the ball short and quick is certainly the way Spain did it at Euro2008 (a team that in my mind is superior to the current one.) England have the players in central midfield to do this. Lamps is one of the best in the world on the ball (something he never gets credit for) and Barry or Carrick are certainly capable of doing this as well.

The first problem England have for me is the 4-4-2. It's well established that 4-3-3 will always be better at keeping the ball than 4-4-2, particularly when the players used Heskey/Defoe aren't really worth having the extra striker anyway.

The second problem and one that causes the 4-4-2 to be used, is this silly notion that Gerrard and Lampard can't be played in the same midfield. Gerrard should in my mind be played behind Rooney and allowed to get past Rooney if need be. In my mind he is a player who is better with the ball running at defenders in space in my view. Lampard is a much better distributer of the ball and then can be left deeper and can make his runs when need be. Barry or Carrick or whoever can certainly be left in behind to cover those runs.

Make no mistake England can play with speed and keep the ball, they just need to stop playing a useless second striker and get the extra player into midfield to keep the ball a bit more. As you say that isn't easy when you have morons clamouring for a more traditional English style of play that isn't used in Premier League anymore. The English teams that have been dominant in the CL haven't done it by playing 4-4-2 and crossing into the box, they've done it by keeping the ball, but also having the ability to break quickly and be devestating on the counter.

Obviously that's slightly off topic, the truth is defences are better than ever before and are getting better all the time, you can't just punch it wide to the wingers and hope to cross into the box and score. Spain's tactics of playing with patience and keeping the ball are absolutely effective, not least because they have strikers of the calibre of Villa to finish their chances. From a neutral perspective and given that I'm watching the games at 4:30 in the morning, I'd like it if they would chance their arm a bit more, particularly because we know they can. But it's the WC and you do what it takes to win.

[Valerie]

stride, on 09 July 2010 - 06:14 PM, said:

i'm not sure if this will help?

It's brilliant! I thought I'd use it as an avatar this weekend, but somehow it doesn't show

[evissy]

Paul the octopus predicted Spain
A bird in thailand predicted Holland as did the orangatang in Estonia

2-1 to Holland!

I would hate to see Spain win. Spain=Barcelona. I hate to look at Spains 1 meter long passes between Xavi and Iniesta, it kills the pace and the game. Villa is great, well was.. as he is now a Barca-member.

I hope Sneijder scores both ricochetin from Puyols arse. Villa can score Spains only goal. I'm also expecting a tough tackle from VanBommel towards Xavi or Iniesta.

[loz]

Spiller86, on 10 July 2010 - 12:56 AM, said:

I think quick tempo football is always preferable. I am continually frustrated against poor teams when we play too slow and let teams just sit back in deep. But quick tempo football needs to be accompanied by shortish passing. Moving the ball short and quick is certainly the way Spain did it at Euro2008 (a team that in my mind is superior to the current one.) England have the players in central midfield to do this. Lamps is one of the best in the world on the ball (something he never gets credit for) and Barry or Carrick are certainly capable of doing this as well.

The second problem and one that causes the 4-4-2 to be used, is this silly notion that Gerrard and Lampard can't be played in the same midfield. Gerrard should in my mind be played behind Rooney and allowed to get past Rooney if need be. In my mind he is a player who is better with the ball running at defenders in space in my view. Lampard is a much better distributer of the ball and then can be left deeper and can make his runs when need be. Barry or Carrick or whoever can certainly be left in behind to cover those runs.

Make no mistake England can play with speed and keep the ball, they just need to stop playing a useless second striker and get the extra player into midfield to keep the ball a bit more. As you say that isn't easy when you have morons clamouring for a more traditional English style of play that isn't used in Premier League anymore. The English teams that have been dominant in the CL haven't done it by playing 4-4-2 and crossing into the box, they've done it by keeping the ball, but also having the ability to break quickly and be devestating on the counter.

Apologies I didn't make myself clear Spiller. I agree entirely that the tempo is required in terms of passing the ball and not inviting teams into the game. I was referring to the idea of having to get the ball from one end of the park to the other in as short a time as possible. Personally I am not convinced that Barry and Carrick are that capable. Both of them tend to need to keep their eye on the ball too much and this slows things down as they take too long to control the ball, pick out the pass and then make it.

I am acually wondering whether Lampard's career will a victim of the failed World Cup campaign. If Fabio is being honest about making changes and looking to bring in younger players then Lamps is vulnerable due to being a little older than Gerrard.

Your point about how ENglish clubs play is what baffles me most about Capello's tactics in the World Cup. He took a load of players, played too many out of position and asked them to play tactics that very few of them play at club level. Very odd.

[Hutch]

Randy36, on 09 July 2010 - 11:26 PM, said:

I believe England's problem is that we haven't developed our style of play. As you know, speed does not guarantee victories nor does one touch football. I was impressed that every time Spain received the ball , they slowed down the game, maintained possession and prevented Germany from getting into their rhythm. Simple and very effective. Many fans would call it "boring". I don't mean to say that England should emulate Spain. We have speed and guts but games are not won on those alone. It's up to Capello to find a Plan B or discover attributes that assure England can develop. English fans may eventually have to accept that in order for England to succeed they may have to be a little bit more "boring". So what do we want? Gutsy speed and pace or another star on our shirt!

i think what we want is a little more variety.

to find Spain's style of play boring doesn't in any way deny that there are problems with the English game. most top teams will have have spells of prolonged possession and that's fine. however, against Germany Spain seemed far more intent on retaining possession than on creating chances. they had vastly more possession than Germany and they had more shots than Germany. but really that was it. where was the excitement? the sustained periods of pressure? the near misses, frantic goalmouth action? where were the great saves or near misses that had they gone in would have been contenders for goal of the tournament? despite all their possession, the one goal they managed came from the simplest of set plays and came as a result of poor marking.

in short, there was very little change of pace and no end product to their passing game, not against Germany anyway. what i'd like to see is pass pass pass pass pounce instead of pass pass pass pass pass. and pass again. and again and again and again.

[Spiller86]

loz, on 10 July 2010 - 08:21 AM, said:

Apologies I didn't make myself clear Spiller. I agree entirely that the tempo is required in terms of passing the ball and not inviting teams into the game. I was referring to the idea of having to get the ball from one end of the park to the other in as short a time as possible. Personally I am not convinced that Barry and Carrick are that capable. Both of them tend to need to keep their eye on the ball too much and this slows things down as they take too long to control the ball, pick out the pass and then make it.

I am acually wondering whether Lampard's career will a victim of the failed World Cup campaign. If Fabio is being honest about making changes and looking to bring in younger players then Lamps is vulnerable due to being a little older than Gerrard.

Your point about how ENglish clubs play is what baffles me most about Capello's tactics in the World Cup. He took a load of players, played too many out of position and asked them to play tactics that very few of them play at club level. Very odd.

Yeah apologies, in that case I certainly agree with your point. I can also see your point on Barry/Carrick, I think of far more concern is that neither have the defensive characteristics required to play deep, for the life of me I'll never know why Barry simply didn't foul Oezil in the leadup to the final German goal. Parker who is vastly underrated would have done much better in my view, although he isn't without his own limitations on the ball.

Honestly I think the only reason Capello wasn't sacked was because of the payout required. Obviously we're all armchair managers here, but United, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea have been successful in the CL in recent seasons also entirely playing 4-3-3. The most crucial players Gerrard, Lampard Rooney are all used to that system, yet Capello chose 4-4-2, and not even to accomodate a player worthy of playing international football, he picks Heskey from obscurity to fill that hole. Furthermore, the suicidal charge that was made at 2-1 with most of a half to go against Germany was Ranieri vs Monaco-eque and should have got him the sack even before everything else was considered.

So now, instead of the manager getting sacked as he should have, for poor tactics and poor selections, the players will cop the brunt. And your right, Lamps will probably be the first in the firing line. For some reason he's never been valued by supporters or the media. He's very, very good on the ball (much better than Gerrard IMO) but perhaps because he isn't all action and is a bit more (I hate this word but I'll use it) cultured he doesn't get the kudos he deserves.

The usual clowns will carry on as if it doesn't matter, but if Lampard goes then England lose in my mind their last real hope for a time of playing similar possession football to Spain. Capello will pin his hopes on Barry, Ian Wright et al. will get their wish, and England will (continue to) win nothing.

[loz]

Before the World Cup my biggest concern with taking Parker was that I thought he was always going to be a red card waiting to happen due to the often over fussy refereeing we see at international tournaments. As it turns out players got away with a lot more persistent fouling than you do in the Premiership so Parker woud have been OK.

[dkw]

What makes me laugh with the England squad situation is the imbeciles who seem to think dropping Terry and Lampard will make a massive difference and mean we will suddenly be world class and win things. When you then ask them who the replacements would be its hilarious to hear them rhyme off a load of very average players.

[Maximus]

evissy, on 10 July 2010 - 07:40 AM, said:

I would hate to see Spain win. Spain=Barcelona. I hate to look at Spains 1 meter long passes between Xavi and Iniesta, it kills the pace and the game. Villa is great, well was.. as he is now a Barca-member.

I hope Sneijder scores both ricochetin from Puyols arse. Villa can score Spains only goal. I'm also expecting a tough tackle from VanBommel towards Xavi or Iniesta.

.. one for Sergei Biscuits too.
Dont want anyone to get injured though.
Capdevilla/Puyol vs Robben should be also interesting. I hope Robben gets one of them a red card.
I am expecting a bunch of small cynical tackles from dutch midfielders followed by Spanish playacting/complaining... and a controversial referee decision to decide the winners.

[Arq]

dkw, on 10 July 2010 - 10:57 AM, said:

What makes me laugh with the England squad situation is the imbeciles who seem to think dropping Terry and Lampard will make a massive difference and mean we will suddenly be world class and win things. When you then ask them who the replacements would be its hilarious to hear them rhyme off a load of very average players.

Yeah, people seem to think that since Germany went young, that if England (or anyone else) mimics them that they will have the same success. Germany did much more than that.

Dropping JT and Lamps will make a massive difference for the England squad. I just don't think it'll be positive.

[Randy36]

Arq, on 10 July 2010 - 12:35 PM, said:

Yeah, people seem to think that since Germany went young, that if England (or anyone else) mimics them that they will have the same success. Germany did much more than that.

England are in a similar position to where Germany was back in the late 90s.The German FA realised that something had to be done to improve their national team. They studied the French system and decided something similar was needed. So early in 1999 Beckenbauer and company came up with a new concept for producing young German footballers.They established over 100 national talent centres across Germany to assist 10 to 17 year olds with technical clinics. In addition, all professional clubs were required to build youth academies. The concept obviously has worked as witnessed by Germany's recent performance in the World Cup in reaching the semi-final stages with a very young team. Watch out for them in the 2014 World Cup.

My question - Should England follow Germany's example?

[loz]

Whether they should or shouldn't is one discussion point. Whether they will or won't is another. I doubt the FA could afford to implement such a regime in the current economic climate (hell they rape every penny they can out of Wembley to try and afford that) and if they didn't act when times were rosier they won't now that times are tight.

Also they wouldn't be able to make professional clubs invest in youth academies because of financial problems at club level and also the fact that clubs won't co-operate due to not seeing sufficient reward in doing it.

[Randy36]

loz, on 10 July 2010 - 03:17 PM, said:

Whether they should or shouldn't is one discussion point. Whether they will or won't is another. I doubt the FA could afford to implement such a regime in the current economic climate (hell they rape every penny they can out of Wembley to try and afford that) and if they didn't act when times were rosier they won't now that times are tight.

Also they wouldn't be able to make professional clubs invest in youth academies because of financial problems at club level and also the fact that clubs won't co-operate due to not seeing sufficient reward in doing it.

I agree, and it doesn't look good for the future of England's World Cup performances!!

[Valerie]

Valerie, on 10 July 2010 - 07:19 AM, said:

It's brilliant! I thought I'd use it as an avatar this weekend, but somehow it doesn't show

Oh look, it finally worked! Now I can't bloody figure out how to change my text. Oh well, I see at as diversion. Besides, Carlo will be back....