8 comments

• 

  The_Arse

  10 months ago

  Entering this World Cup cycle it can be argued that England has more talent than any other national team on the planet: the problem is due to the Premier League’s global nature and new found de-emphasis on player development, England’s window is shutting rather quickly.
  
  I would like to hear someone really try and make this argument because it's an absolute load of rubbish.
  reply
• 

  kkfla737

  10 months ago

  It's a matter of opinion. I co-host a twice weekly show with an ESPN personality who believes the US has the best talent in the world but is hamstrung by bad tactics. I disagree with him, but wouldn't make the statement you made.
  
  Do you care to argue with me on this issue? I'd love to have the discussion. In my mind England's talent level is far beyond anyone else. The problem is lack of tactical flexibility among England players, and the inability for the English to maintain good possession in the midfield. This could be solved with the type of players England has currently. Now your view may be correct, but that again is an opinion. What nations do you believe have more talent than England? Argentina and Brazil obviously can be argued, but honestly does any European nation really have better talent than England? Sure, many have deeper pools but at the very top England's talent I would submit is the best in UEFA.
  reply
• 

  Django

  10 months ago

  Are you drunk? Possibly from a binge-drinking session with John Terry? Focusing on two matches--one win, one draw--as evidence of his leadership is shallow...and as Arse pointed out above, the argument of problems arising from globalization of the Premier League is a dead horse. England's national team is one loaded with nearly all club first-teamers who play domestically except Beckham. You ask the question "What affect will the decision to name John Terry as captain have?" as if he hasn't already led England in a failed Euro qualifying campaign. Heap the blame on McLaren if you want, but Terry's slate isn't clean. Add in the poor form in Terry's personal life--i.e. drunkenly mocking Americans post 9/11, parking in handicap spots (ironically linked in the "Related Posts" of this article), drunken brawls, pissing on the floor of bars--and it doesn't reflect an ideal captain. His commitment to club and country is obviously strong, but his commitment to leading the type of lifestyle that a captaincy demands is lacking. Poor choice for England's captain and weak argument about his merits.
  reply
• 

  Michael

  10 months ago

  Hate to say it, Kartik, but I'm with Django on this one. Terry isn't exactly a model citizen and he's lost it a little bit on the field as well. As Django said, Terry had his chance as captain in Euro 2008 qualifying, and look what he did with it. He's also hurt way too often.
  
  The captain should be Steven Gerrard, England's best two-way player. I can't count how many times he's put Liverpool on his shoulders and carried them by himself to victory. He stays out of trouble off the field, unlike Terry, and also unlike Terry, he's still a top notch player on the field. He's the heart and soul of his club, and you can see it by the way he conducts himself.
  reply
• 

  kkfla737

  10 months ago

  Michael you had me until the Gerrard argument. Some guys are simply better club footballers than internationals or vise versa. (Here in the states we have a whole bunch of guys who play better with the national team than with their club sides)
  
  Gerrard, I believe is not even deserving of a place in England's starting XI. He doesn't have the quality an attacking midfielder in the international game must have to hold the ball and play with his back to goal. He does not embrace playing out wide where Beckham is anyway. I know this will be wildly controversial and probably make people angrier at me than the initial post but I'd take Lampard in the international game anyday or the week over Gerrard. I even question if Gerrard would be an effective player in Serie A or La Liga: he lacks the basic qualities to play in anything but a distinctly English system. Lampard is a footballer who can excel in a cosmopolitan setup and is better bet for England long term.
  
  The captain should be a center back or keeper. If not Terry, Ferdinand was the obvious choice not Gerrard.
  reply
• 

  Django

  10 months ago

  But how effective would Gerrard be in MLS?
  reply
• 

  kkfla737

  10 months ago

  You may laugh but MLS is a totally different animal. It's not really proper football which is why even the best foreign players have trouble while some weak footballers dominate.
  
  Some players of great quality flop here because of the extensive travel, altitude and poor training facilities. Others who couldn't even excel at the conference level dominate. You really can never tell with MLS, quite honestly.
  reply
• 

  ls7

  10 months ago

  England do not have the best talent pool in the world or Europe. I'd rank the first XIs of Italy and Spain ahead of them, possibly Germany and France as well. That said, they should qualify for the next World Cup and really should have done better in Euro qualifying.
  
  The import obsessed Premier League is doing harm to the English national talent pool but the Premier League's business is not making the England national team better. It's business is to generate cash for the owners. With increased foreign ownership, the strength of the national team is of even less concern.
  
  The problems in the English setup are many and complex. For example, just one of the problems is that teams are hamstrung in recruiting English players because of the 'local lad' rules that were put in place. The rule states that the club cannot recruit a youth player who lives more than an hour away from the academy.
  
  That's just one of the problems. There are many others that have been discussed and dissected ad nauseum :)
  reply