Russia and Turkey's performance!

[reds123]

The way Russia played vs Sweden and Holland and the way Turkey played vs Germany is much better than the three lions have ever played under Mc Laren and Eriksson with England vs Germany in 2001 the only exception.

Just imagine the national team playing like Russia vs Holland! Imagine the price tag for every English player; players like Carrick or Barry will cost 18 mill.sterling while Arshavin is going to cost Barca 8 or 9 million sterling.

And to put insult to the injury imagine the wages that the club has to pay them. They earn 4 or 5 times more than the Turkish or Russian players!!!

English footballers are spoiled coz their clubs treat them like gods. It's about time that sometinhg happens before it's too late !!!

[Robbie-9-Fowler]

players like barry and carrick already cost £18 million mate lol

[Shaggy]

players like barry and carrick already cost £18 million mate lol

Haha, I was gonna say.

Funnily enough though I was thinking almost exactly the same thing last night. How can Turkey reach another semi-final and play with such freedom and attacking verve, while England haven't produced anything like that (in the finals of a tournament) in my lifetime!!!

[-V-]

Brilliant tournament, the Turks have been awesome and if hadn't of been for some bad luck with suspensions and injuries they would be in the Final. Russia have also been superb. Love the way their full-backs constantly bomb forward and join the attacks.

Maybe this is a kick up the arse for your English players, they might see this and think 'why can't we play like this'?

[Tee]

Either the English players fix up and push their game to this level and beyond or there will be fewer and fewer of them in the top teams. Simple as.

[Rich]

Technically they are all sound players though - too often we accept players that need to think to control the ball and hence under pressure they can slip up.

[PTP]

Haha, I was gonna say.

Funnily enough though I was thinking almost exactly the same thing last night. How can Turkey reach another semi-final and play with such freedom and attacking verve, while England haven't produced anything like that (in the finals of a tournament) in my lifetime!!!

A mixture of things i reckon.

Firstly i reckon the English team is put under immense pressure from the press, fans, and also the fact that pretty much every nation we play against ****ing hate us for some reason or other.

Secondly, you look at these teams that do well, like turkey, russia etc - they are not full of primadonna superstars, they are commited to the national team, they seem to have a great sense of togetherness, good team spirit etc. Add that with a few flair players and they can raise the bar to match the big guns. A perfect example would be the Czech team of a few years ago - they had the likes of Nedved but also other players that would struggle to get into the england set up. But they gelled as a team.

The english team, on paper - easily one of the best teams in the world, full of superstars(at least in their own minds) but the always seems to be an ar of arrogance around the england team - they don't come across as down to earth, hard working, work for each other team like pretty much every other nation. They seem to be their to boost there own egos and their own careers.

Plus our national team takes second place to the premier league and the squad seem to spend less time together than other nations.

for me a starting english 11 would look something like this

------------------James--------

Micah Richards-----terry----Ferdinand------cole

-----Lampard-------Gerrard--------Barry

-----rooney------owen--------cole


Now i know people are going to have their own opinions on players, tactics, who is on form etc everyone will have their own ideas etc - thats not what i am looking at - if we just take that team down, on paper, as a rough idea as the top 11 english players and compare with the rest of europe, what would you swap! not a lot imo

Swap James for - Casillas, Buffon, Van Der Sar, etc
I think the back four is as good as any back four in europe

now the midfield and attack can be played around with, so thats were we will get the debats/arguements - so for arguements sake - which team in europe can boast a stronger THREE than Lampard, Gerrard, Barry????? it's difficult

And then the same for the front three, you would swap owen for pretty much most strikers at the moment - Torres, Villa, etc etc - but rooney and joe cole are top top players and would probably get in every starting 11 in europe

[Reece]

Lampard? Get tae ****.

Other than that can't disagree with a lot. Maybe I'd have Woodgate instead of Wio. Still think a fit Woodgate is our best CB.

[PTP]

Lampard? Get tae ****.

Other than that can't disagree with a lot. Maybe I'd have Woodgate instead of Wio. Still think a fit Woodgate is our best CB.

- haha the debate starts. Re lampard, i'm not his biggest fan by any means - i think he is hugely overrated - but at the end of the day, he is highly thought off amongst coaches/managers/media pundits/fellow players, plays every week for a team that in the last 5 years or so have been very successful - so as much as we all think he is an overated fat ****ing ****** he can't be ****ing ****e can he?

See, I honestly have never seen what all the fuss over woodgate is.

[Rich]

the other problem is that many English teams are now converting to the 4231 system - United, Chelsea, Arsenal and Us all deploy it in many, many games. Generally England play 442 so you've got a change of system that they need to adapt to and also arguably England doesn't have a striker that can comfortably play the solo role, that Torres, Drogba, Adebayor can play.

[Rich]

RE: Lampard

It's obvious that there isn't really a system where you can play Gerrard AND Lampard, not without negating one of their talents (and it's usually Gerrard as he's more adaptable) so a tough decision needs to be made - if it's 4231, then Gerrard plays and Lampard is dropped to be his understudy, if Gerrard doesn't perform then he's dropped and Lampard takes over. Simple.

Pick the system and the way of playing, before picking your best players.

[PTP]

The team i tried to pick was basically best on - imo - the top 11 english players

GK - not much to go on

RB - i know he plays CB for city, but he could easily make rb his own and there is no better english option for rb

CB - pick themselves imo

LB as does ashley cole

Midfield - Gerrard obv - Barry has a good partnership with him, Lampard has to be up there - who else is there? - i'd have Hargreaves in the squad, carrick i'm unsure about, i don't see any other English Cm's coming close (shame cause about 4/5 years ago i was convinced that scott parker was going to be ****ing class and make himself a permant fixture)

Attacking players - Owen cause of his record/experience plus lack off other class strikers - rooney and joe cole would be are flair players, make things happen etc - they are streets ahead of the rest but the others would make the squad and give good options - the likes of bentley, ashley young

[Rich]

The team i tried to pick was basically best on - imo - the top 11 english players

GK - not much to go on

RB - i know he plays CB for city, but he could easily make rb his own and there is no better english option for rb

CB - pick themselves imo

LB as does ashley cole

Midfield - Gerrard obv - Barry has a good partnership with him, Lampard has to be up there - who else is there? - i'd have Hargreaves in the squad, carrick i'm unsure about, i don't see any other English Cm's coming close (shame cause about 4/5 years ago i was convinced that scott parker was going to be ****ing class and make himself a permant fixture)

Attacking players - Owen cause of his record/experience plus lack off other class strikers - rooney and joe cole would be are flair players, make things happen etc - they are streets ahead of the rest but the others would make the squad and give good options - the likes of bentley, ashley young

We've tried that for years and it doesn't work.

Pick the best people for their specific role in the team. No square pegs etc.

We have above average GKs, quality centrehalves, decentish fullbacks, strong midfield, and several options in attack. Just need a style of play to suit them.

[PTP]

RE: Lampard

It's obvious that there isn't really a system where you can play Gerrard AND Lampard, not without negating one of their talents (and it's usually Gerrard as he's more adaptable) so a tough decision needs to be made - if it's 4231, then Gerrard plays and Lampard is dropped to be his understudy, if Gerrard doesn't perform then he's dropped and Lampard takes over. Simple.

Pick the system and the way of playing, before picking your best players.

- you last point hits it on the head - thats what i was trying to get across put was struggline to find the words, phrase to emphasis it.

The other teams in Europe have a system and pick the players for the system - so in some cases there is players playing for teams and you find yourself thinking - how the **** is he starting, he's wank, they must have someone better than that, etc etc - In england, mainly due to the pressure from the press - the last 5-10 years the english managers have gone for the big names etc.

[PTP]

We've tried that for years and it doesn't work.

Pick the best people for their specific role in the team. No square pegs etc.

We have above average GKs, quality centrehalves, decentish fullbacks, strong midfield, and several options in attack. Just need a style of play to suit them.

I know, hence why i picked the team just for arguements sake, If noone else in europe, qualified coaches etc can't find a system - then i 'm not naiming my for free