***England v Germany***

[WhingForPresident]

Well this simply isn't true is it. We didn't qualify for the world cup finals in '74, '78 or '94, so we're not further behind than ever before!

We had a better team in 94 than we do right now.. I can't say anything for the 70's.

 

[Bold Seagull]

We had a better team in 94 than we do right now.. I can't say anything for the 70's.

Yes of course, who could forget the silky skills of Andy Sinton, Carlton Palmer, Stuart Ripley, Tony Dorigo, and the ever able David Platt. Yes, 1994 really was a vintage year for England teams!

 

[gordonchas]

We had a better team in 94 than we do right now.. I can't say anything for the 70's.

I can. Only 16 teams qualified for the World Cup in 1974 and 1978 so qualification was much harder. What's more the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia had not been split up into 57 varieties and therefore the European section was stronger still.

The team that failed to qualify against Poland in 1973 was Peter Shilton, Paul Madeley, Emlyn Hughes, Colin Bell, Roy McFarland, Norman Hunter, Tony Currie, Mike Channon, Martin Chivers, Allan Clarke and Martin Peters. Even allowing for the difficulty in comparing different eras, which I'm loathe to do, England still had one of the strongest teams in world football at that time.

That's not even remotely the case right now.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I can. Only 16 teams qualified for the World Cup in 1974 and 1978 so qualification was much harder. What's more the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia had not been split up into 57 varieties and therefore the European section was stronger still.
.

How on EARTH can you possibly draw that conclusion?

The USSR and Yugoslavia, strong though they were, could only take two slots.

Now you are competing against Croatia, Bosnia, Ukraine, Russia, etc

 

[Bold Seagull]

I can. Only 16 teams qualified for the World Cup in 1974 and 1978 so qualification was much harder. What's more the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia had not been split up into 57 varieties and therefore the European section was stronger still.

The team that failed to qualify against Poland in 1973 was Peter Shilton, Paul Madeley, Emlyn Hughes, Colin Bell, Roy McFarland, Norman Hunter, Tony Currie, Mike Channon, Martin Chivers, Allan Clarke and Martin Peters. Even allowing for the difficulty in comparing different eras, which I'm loathe to do, England still had one of the strongest teams in world football at that time.

That's not even remotely the case right now.

What, in a qualifying group of just Poland and Wales we managed to win just 1 game in 4!? Strongest team in world football my butt cheeks. The same England that lost 2-0 to Scotland in May '74!?

 

[gordonchas]

How on EARTH can you possibly draw that conclusion?

The USSR and Yugoslavia, strong though they were, could only take two slots.

Now you are competing against Croatia, Bosnia, Ukraine, Russia, etc

Oh dear.

The groups back then were small and only 1 team qualified. A single slip up meant no qualification. In 1974 England had to play only Poland and Wales. They failed because they couldn't beat Poland or Wales at home. In 1978 the other teams were Finland, Luxembourg and Italy. That effectively came down to who scored the most goals against the weak teams. As it turned out it was Italy.

There was no margin for error back then, the big games were effectively like play-offs.

Now you get two chances to qualify. What's more the former Yugoslav states are weakened by being separate. If you could still construct a composite side from Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia, Slovenia, Macedonia and Montenegro, would that be a better team than any of those individually? Of course it would. Just as if there was a GB side that could include Bale in its ranks.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Oh dear.

The groups back then were small and only 1 team qualified. A single slip up meant no qualification. In 1974 England had to play only Poland and Wales. They failed because they couldn't beat Poland or Wales at home. In 1978 the other teams were Finland, Luxembourg and Italy. That effectively came down to who scored the most goals against the weak teams. As it turned out it was Italy.

There was no margin for error back then, the big games were effectively like play-offs.

Now you get two chances to qualify. What's more the former Yugoslav states are weakened by being separate. If you could still construct a composite side from Croatia, Serbia, Bosnia, Slovenia, Macedonia and Montenegro, would that be a better team than any of those individually? Of course it would. Just as if there was a GB side that could include Bale in its ranks.

Don't be a dick. 'oh dear'? I was referring to the second part of your statement - you know - the bit I put in BOLD? Of course qualification over-all was tougher - there were only 16 places. But to suggest that the break up of those countries makes it easier, is daft. Given that CROATIA and RUSSIA generally DO still qualify anyway, all of the other states can only be considered as ADDED competition (for qualification - their chances AT the WC are a different debate).

 

[Albumen]

Have you not just contradicted yourself? Surely the clubs of the Premier League are the ones who could be doing more at grass roots level to teach the kids, and even teach those who teach. The Premier League has created a insular world of short term greed based on simply staying in the league. Any long term planning is second to signing ready made players to keep you up, or getting in the top 4.

How many home grown young players have the top 6 clubs bought through their ranks in recent years? It's a handful at best. We're talking our countries best 6 sides and out of say a collective squad size of about 120 players, it must be 10 or so who or English and bought through their clubs youth system.

Why would they spend millions in investing in the local youth football at all levels, when they can pick up a ready made left back from Belgium or wherever for £2m?

How can you not blame our own club sides and the greed of the Premier League that drives them!?

The reason most haven't made it is down to pre-professional club attitude. The school teachers of today may be using barca's, arsenals or Munichs tactics as it's shown all over the world and kids know about it. In 2000 you had school teachers brought up with early 90's english football with little european input. The only team in the league late 80's playing beautiful football was Liverpool, the rest of the league were sunday league style.
We may see the benefits of spanish and german football in the next 10 years . Until then we're playing catch up.

 

[gordonchas]

Don't be a dick. 'oh dear'? I was referring to the second part of your statement - you know - the bit I put in BOLD? Of course qualification over-all was tougher - there were only 16 places. But to suggest that the break up of those countries makes it easier, is daft. Given that CROATIA and RUSSIA generally DO still qualify anyway, all of the other states can only be considered as ADDED competition (for qualification - their chances AT the WC are a different debate).

No, it dilutes the pool. If you split England up into six regions - each with their own separate team - are you telling me this would increase or decrease the chances of English representation at a tournament?

Would England have won a group this year that consisted of themselves, Poland, the former Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union (instead of having to contend with Montenegro and Ukraine).

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

We may see the benefits of spanish and german football in the next 10 years

No chance, unless the FA impliment a coherent strategy for spotting and developing talent like both of these countries have.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

No, it dilutes the pool. If you split England up into six regions - each with their own separate team - are you telling me this would increase or decrease the chances of English representation at a tournament?

Would England have won a group this year that consisted of themselves, Poland, the former Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union (instead of having to contend with Montenegro and Ukraine).

You would have a point, IF Croatia and Russia, didn't consistently STILL qualify for every tournament. Because they almost always DO, your point is moot, and all of the other 'new' states can only be viewed as additional (if not especially strong) competition.

For example in 2006, Croatia, Serbia and Ukraine all qualified, whereas USSR and Yugoslavia could only concievably have taken two places. Next year will see Russia, Croatia AND Bosnia all there.

So you're wrong. Sorry.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The reason most haven't made it is down to pre-professional club attitude.

but so few who are at pro clubs make it so I'm not sure I follow this argument.

 

[nicko31]

In Premier League starting XI's we have about 75 englishman starting games, or 34% English.

That means 66% are better footballers from abroad. This should tell you why we shouldn't be expecting to be rolling over other nations in the international game.

Brazil - 93% Brazilian
Bundesliga - 76% German
La liga - 60% Spanish
Serie A - 56% Italian

Not only are their homegrown players playing at the top level in their own countries, we have their remaining top players over here getting better in our leagues!

How many English centre backs actually start in the Premier League each week? Those that do pretty much get in the England squad, we are that short on choice. It's not rocket science, but people do need to adjust their expectations of what our national team can be expected to achieve.

The other problem is so few of our young players aspire to playing in other leagues, the lure of potentially bing bucks in PL or even Championhip is just too great.

 

[Bold Seagull]

No chance, unless the FA impliment a coherent strategy for spotting and developing talent like both of these countries have.

The biggest problem is that the FA, Premier League and Football League continue to disagree on many fundamental issues, and so getting agreement on a coherent strategy is taking decades in itself.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

The biggest problem is that the FA, Premier League and Football League continue to disagree on many fundamental issues, and so getting agreement on a coherent strategy is taking decades in itself.

True. I have said this myself.

 

[Mackenzie]

The Germans have got it right. The FA, football league and PL should get straight over there and learn how to administrate football.