English Football. (long)

[Bedreviter]

Except for Kaka I dont think any of them are as good as Gerrard. Hard to find a big team in Europe that have so much of their recent success (last 3-4 seasons) been determined by one player as Liverpool/Gerrard.

Fabregas might be there in a few years, and Totti is more of a striker than a midfielder. Kaka also has a more offensive role than what Gerrard do, but Ill agree that hes a better player.

What Rooney refused to do for FA has very little to do about his talent and play on the field.

And as the complaint in the article was how bad the youth system in British football is I think its unfair to use Deco as an example of Portugals programe as he was 19 years old when he moved to Portugal.

[The once and future king]

[ QUOTE ]
most successful teams in the Premiership, Arsenal and ManU, play the continental style of play.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just false. Yes on the continent technical ability is everything, but ManU and Arsenal and otheres add something that is unique to the english game, this is why players who have performed at the highest level in Europe often stuggle when they come to the Premiership.

What is this thing? A philosophy of balls to wall all out relentless attacking at pace. On the continent technical skills are used to maintain possession and too patiently look for an opportunity to break down the opponents. In the EPL they are used to attack full throttle. This is why the EPL is the most popular league in the world by a huge margin. I would say the team that tries to plays most to a purely continental style is Liverpool. A strength of the Chelsea team is that they have been able to switch gears between a pure continental style and to an EPL sytle if the former has failed to get a result.

Chelsea and Liverpool are often accused of being boring and it is because they play a more pure continental style which some may consider boring when compared to the high EPL style of say the Arse and the Scum, which is different to the low EPL style of the long ball proponents. Though it must be said that long ball is a result of pragmatism, if you are a small club that cant buy the most gifted technical players, then buying giants and hoofing the ball forward can help you negate this dis-advantage.

What is forgotten by many is that prior to English clubs being banned from Europe, English clubs made up nearly entirely of British players dominated in Europe for long periods against teams full of much more technically gifted Europeans. We did this by in your face physicality, aggression,and sheer refusal to lose.

The game has no doubt changed, but those virtues of the English game still exist and help contribute to the success of English teams in Europe.

The reason why we have not done so well in the International game, is recently the totally retarded choice of Steve not won anything at club level Mclaren, but over time has been the lack of one true world class game winner such as a Maradona, Zidane etc. I think this is type of player you need to go all the way in international cup competitions, having solid players in all positions is not enough, you need one true genius (unless you are German). The nearest the English have had to this recently is Gazza, and it is no coincidence that we reached two semi-finals with him in the squad.

As for grass root football teaching bad habits. I have played grass roots Saturday football for several years. I would blame poor officiating at grass roots for the promotion of physicality over technical ability. Coaches are loathe to play technical players when an 7 foot neanderthal can kick them off the park. Ironicaly The best player ever to play for us (retired due to broken leg) had trials with Derby City but was rejected for having to small a frame.

[ThaSaltCracka]

interesting post TOAFK.

[Disturbance]

[ QUOTE ]

What is forgotten by many is that prior to English clubs being banned from Europe, English clubs made up nearly entirely of British players dominated in Europe for long periods against teams full of much more technically gifted Europeans. We did this by in your face physicality, aggression,and sheer refusal to lose.

The game has no doubt changed, but those virtues of the English game still exist and help contribute to the success of English teams in Europe.

The reason why we have not done so well in the International game, is recently the totally retarded choice of Steve not won anything at club level Mclaren, but over time has been the lack of one true world class game winner such as a Maradona, Zidane etc. I think this is type of player you need to go all the way in international cup competitions, having solid players in all positions is not enough, you need one true genius (unless you are German). The nearest the English have had to this recently is Gazza, and it is no coincidence that we reached two semi-finals with him in the squad.



[/ QUOTE ]

Good post. I think some of the other posts in this thread have gone way over the top in denigrating the so-called "English" style of play and the coaching. For the last 2 international tournaments England have had a squad of excellent players who are comparable to pretty all the other teams they were up against. The problem is the tabloid media relentlessly drives expectations that England are better than they really are.

England have failed to acheive greater success for a number of reasons but I think Sven summed it up when he said "With England I did not have a player like Elano". e.g someone truly world class such as Gascoigne who is capable of turning a game with a through ball/dribble/skill that most players are incapable of.

[ThaSaltCracka]

I really don't understand that statement by Sven. Gerrard is such a sick player.


To me it seems like a management issue. With all the media scrutiny, managers are so reluctant to try anything new. There is probably a few players in the Prem who should be given a chance, even in friendlies. For some reason people feel like England has to win every game, even useless ones.

[Disturbance]

[ QUOTE ]
I really don't understand that statement by Sven. Gerrard is such a sick player.



[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that Gerrard is a great player, but I think what Sven was referring to was players who are able to operate above everyone else on a *creative* level and I don't think Gerrard is able to do that. He does spot a lot of oppurtunities to play killer passes but more often than not fails to pull it off from my experience. I see him as an excellent box to box midfielder with a lot of energy, great goal scorer and good passer. He is not however a true playmaker like Zidane/Ronaldinho/Kaka etc who are able to see and do things that other players can't. You don't necessarily need a player like this to be a champion team but it helps a lot if you want to play mostly attacking football to do it.

[tarheeljks]

i'm denigrating the style b/c i think it's boring. i'm not saying it's ineffective.

[Jay Riall]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm denigrating the style b/c i think it's boring. i'm not saying it's ineffective.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you ever watched a Serie A match? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[tarheeljks]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i'm denigrating the style b/c i think it's boring. i'm not saying it's ineffective.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you ever watched a Serie A match? zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[/ QUOTE ]

that goes w/o saying [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Disturbance]

[ QUOTE ]
i'm denigrating the style b/c i think it's boring. i'm not saying it's ineffective.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's your opinion, personally I didn't find England's performances in winning 3 consecutive games 3-0 boring, each to their own.