ale wrote:
this working with the players he has though?...Wales have been used as a stick to beat England with but theres a lot of truth in it...Coleman had far fewer players at the highest level to choose from did he not?
Yes, though this could be an advantage. I didn't follow the pre-tournament discussion around Wales and England that closely, but I'd imagine that anyone familiar with Wales would have been able to name perhaps 20-21 of the squad some weeks in advance. Knowing who the players are going to be allows you more time to work on tactics etc.
Whereas with England, even when you think you know who's in contention, some player you hadn't really thought about starts turning in performances and you start considering him as well. With a bigger pool of players, your thinking can get more clouded.
The other thing is that Wales probably have more players for whom the national team is a major thing because their club careers are not looking so bright. That can be a big motivation to do well, as with Robson-Kanu. In that sense, there's truth in the notion that 'England players are too comfortable'. They are, in that all of them are with, or are wanted by, relatively big clubs.
I know Slovakia better than Wales, but I think some of these characteristics were shared by these 2 countries ;
1. One genuine star player (Hamsik / Bale) technically better than any England possessed(?)
2. A few other very solid players well established at big clubs (Skrtel, Kucka / Ramsey)
3. Players for whom an international tournament was truly a career highlight (several on both sides)
4. Players whose outlook at club level looked uncertain thus giving extra motivation (Adam Nemec / Robson-Kanu)
5. Not having more than a max of 2 players under consideration for most positions in the team.
6. Knowing pretty much what the squad would be well ahead of the tournament, with perhaps 2 or 3 places up for debate.
7. Knowing what your tactics were going to be.
Also, as if the above were not more than enough, the thing about 'the players the coach has available to him' is perhaps not so much about quantity of players operating at the top level, but more about technical ability, tactical awareness etc, and that these things are still not coached well enough at youth levels in England.
It should be a non-issue of whether the next manager is to be English or foreign. I'd like to see the best available option become England's next manager.
See I disagree with this...if you're still going to the bother of running international tournaments on the basis of exclusivity of the competitors/players the same principle should extend to the one who is picking those players...
Why should it? Completely arbitrary either way.
just think if you are going to have tournaments based on national eligibility of those actually playing on the pitch whats the point of not applying the same principle to the coaches/managers?...most of the nations who win trophies do actually stick to this even if its not necessarily relevant to the argument...
It would be unworkable though. You would have to monitor the training sessions 24-7 to make sure the manager wasn't secretly being coached himself by a foreigner.
I know Slovakia better than Wales, but I think some of these characteristics were shared by these 2 countries ;
1. One genuine star player (Hamsik / Bale) technically better than any England possessed(?)
2. A few other very solid players well established at big clubs (Skrtel, Kucka / Ramsey)
Ramsey is also "technically better than any England possessed", that was clear even before his stellar tournament.
Ramsey is a very in-and-out player who effectively goes missing for long stretches of nearly every season. He's talented but let's not pretend he's some kind of Lothar Matthäus figure.
How long will the press give the new boss before turning? What's his minimum target if he wants to keep his job beyond 2018; would he have to get beyond the group stage in Russia?
England weren't just shown up by Wales, though. They lost to Iceland. There seems to be something deeply ingrained, now, about England failing to perform in June as they are able to do in qualifiers. The players genuinely look like they don't want to be there.
Carnivorous Vulgaris wrote: Coleman's done a great job with Wales but he's also profited from being able to field Bale, Ramsey, Allen, Williams and so on. Coleman personally didn't set in motion a chain of events that led to those players emerging from the Welsh game.
No, but only Bale and Ramsey of those would have been definite picks for the England squad, wouldn't they? I think Coleman's advantage lies as much in the limited pool of players he has to select from as in the fact that he has two players of a better technical standard than England's.
It's probably an advantage for a national coach nowadays to 99% know who his two best players for each position are.
Rogin the Armchair fan wrote: England weren't just shown up by Wales, though. They lost to Iceland. There seems to be something deeply ingrained, now, about England failing to perform in June as they are able to do in qualifiers. The players genuinely look like they don't want to be there.
Carnivorous Vulgaris wrote: Probably because they really don't.
In terms of having more important things to do? I doubt that. But in terms of being too terrified by the reaction if they under-perform to perform, then yeah.
Satchmo Distel wrote: Formation is also important. Roy was putting square pegs into wrong holes.
Given that he had so many centre forwards and only sterling and lallana for the wings, perhaps he should have gone for a 4 4 2 diamond with vardy up top with kane, and with Milner alongside rooney, behind delle alli. Drinkwater would have been pretty useful as well.
But it doesn't matter if you're only going to try out a new formation and team on the eve of a tournament
Kane also flopped at the Euro U21s in 2015. The star attacker included in that England squad, he showed basically nothing as the team slumped to bottom of the group. For anyone who watched that, this summer was eerily similar.
I'm hearing a common refrain from Sunderland fans at work, among friends, ex-students etc: if they appoint Sam good luck to him but they'll fuck us up and I'll never support them again.
Mind you, whether he stays or goes, they've bought no-one and only got £2m (?) for Giaccherini, so there's something wrong upstairs, by the look of it.
Satchmo Distel wrote: I think Kane was just gone mentally;
Him and 22 others, to be fair.
I couldn't help but think back to that Spurs v Chelsea game, when they were 2-0 up and collectively lost the plot and their discipline. Ok, the title was basically gone by then but it didn't bode well given how many Spurs players were in the England squad.
BBC reporting that Allardyce has been offered the job. Appointment expected tomorrow upon final contract details, such as Big Sam being reassured about the quality of the pies at Soho Square.
Comment