Is now the time for Lampard to be dropped?

[Les Biehn]

The only thing that worries me about dropping Lampard in favour of Gerrard is that Lampard is by far the more intelligent player. He is more disaplined and uses the ball more intelligently. Personally I would think of starting with the same team and if it is looking poor, dependant on who is playing the worst and what is required I would bring on one or both of Lennon or Crouch. Obvious this depends on Neville being back.

 

[London Irish]

LI, when you say English football and Arsenal in the same breath what exactly do you mean?

The only English thing about them are 2 defenders who have little influence on the attacking output of the Arsenal side.

A more representative description would be "Premiership" style - Arsenal don't represent England, rather the Premiership - our top League.

As regards the Portugal match there are only 2 things Sven has to concern himself with:

1. Holding onto the ball, i.e. the reason we didn't beat Portugal last time, and
2. How to get the best out of our key players - Rooney, Crouch and Gerrard.

Now is the time to be bold. Starting Hargeaves in central midfield is a defensive move, and we need to take advantage of the absence of Deco and dictate.

We will do this by dropping Lampard and playing Crouch alongside Rooney, thus giving everyone clearly-defined responsibilities.

This team understands 4-4-2 and, more importantly, every player (with the possible exception of Joe Cole) would be playing in their best position for their club.

Your comments about Arsenal are too cut and dried. They are an English club and what the style of football they play has an influence on English football because they set an example for others to follow. They may have few English-qualified players at the moment, but this is hardly a policy decision and that could change, as their investment in Walcott shows - their new stadium will also give them the revenue to compete in the overpriced market for the best English pros.

With regards your comments about the Portugal selection, Big Phil's men are renowned for their 4-5-1 and their command of the midfield, are you not slightly concerned that playing 4 in midfield against them might mitigate against your stated priority outlined above of 1) holding on to the ball?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The only thing that worries me about dropping Lampard in favour of Gerrard is that Lampard is by far the more intelligent player. He is more disaplined and uses the ball more intelligently. Personally I would think of starting with the same team and if it is looking poor, dependant on who is playing the worst and what is required I would bring on one or both of Lennon or Crouch. Obvious this depends on Neville being back.

Id disagree - watch him at Chelsea and all he does is bombed forward.

 

[Schrödinger's Toad]

They may have few English-qualified players at the moment, but this is hardly a policy decision and that could change, as their investment in Walcott shows - their new stadium will also give them the revenue to compete in the overpriced market for the best English pros.

Although that's undoubtedly true, they haven't always been priced out; they could have signed Robinson, Carrick and Lennon before Spurs got them for the combined sum of £6m-odd ... they've just been reluctant to invest in Englishmen as a rule.

 

[Sid James]

Well, I think the FA has picked Steve McClaren precisely because he meets the expectations of fans like yourself - enjoy!

You are so cutting LI

Whether McClaren meets my seemingly limited aspirations we shall have to wait and see. What I do know is that if my preferred candidate ( Guus Hiddink ) had been given the job the last thing he would have done is slowed our game down.

And I would not judge Benitez's Liverpool team as typically English and representative of fast, direct football either, nor Wenger's Arsenal. These are examples of how English football is gradually changing - the national team can either be in the vanguard of that process or lag behind, my money is on the latter right now, and I think that's a shame, it's wasted potential.

When Liverpool and Man Utd won the Champions League they were both VERY English in style. Right now all Premiership sides continue to play at a fast tempo, be it with short or long passing, where the emphasis is to endanger the opponents goal as quickly as possible. In defence they press and harry all over the pitch. Who are these patient deliberate English teams you talk about because I can think of none.

 

[Les Biehn]

Id disagree - watch him at Chelsea and all he does is bombed forward.

Well my little love monkey you obviously haven't seen him that much, his range of passing is excellent and he is also good in the tackle.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Id disagree - watch him at Chelsea and all he does is bombed forward.

Exactly.

At Chelsea he has a holding midfielder allowing him to fly forward and is in a team that at times would give the top international sides a run.

Gerrard has more to his game than bombing forward, just look at how he carried Liverpool to the Champions League final.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Well my little love monkey you obviously haven't seen him that much, his range of passing is excellent and he is also good in the tackle.

The one thing he is not good at is tackling. When he had to play a more disciplined role against Barcelona he was not in the game at all. Part of the reason Gerrard has to play a more defensive role for England is down to the fact that Lampard is not capable of doing it.

 

[Les Biehn]

The one thing he is not good at is tackling. When he had to play a more disciplined role against Barcelona he was not in the game at all. Part of the reason Gerrard has to play a more defensive role for England is down to the fact that Lampard is not capable of doing it.

I agree that Lampard is not comfortable in a defensive role but his tackling is still decent Unc.

 

[London Irish]

When Liverpool and Man Utd won the Champions League they were both VERY English in style. Right now all Premiership sides continue to play at a fast tempo, be it with short or long passing, where the emphasis is to endanger the opponents goal as quickly as possible. In defence they press and harry all over the pitch. Who are these patient deliberate English teams you talk about because I can think of none.

To describe Benitez's Liverpool as "very English" is very misleading I feel - what managers like the "Special" One, Benitez and Wenger have all done is successfully fuse Continental methods and tactics with the quicker pace of the English game - as I said a few pages back, the old extremes of "English" and "Continental" football remain clunky and unhelpful to describe what is going on now with these top clubs - and it is having an influence beyond these big clubs when you consider how many other Premiership club sides are leaning towards 4-5-1, the classic formation favoured by possession-conscious Continental teams.

The question remains for England, what style would make them most able to win international tournaments? I feel it has to be with this Continental-influenced style that can vary the pace of the game and keep possession, but yes can also quicken the pace of the game when required in the English style you so crave.

For me, what is missing from this current English team coached by Sven is proof that they can be multi-dimensional - that they can vary the pace the game, that they can deny the opposition the oxygen of possession if the match situation demands it. Unless that changes, I don't see England reaching their true potential over the next 4 or 5 tournaments. McClaren I hope will be a stumble in the road and that a Hiddink or a Scolari figure will be along next.

 

[Sid James]

Possession is an interesting one I think. I looked on the Official World Cup website and here are the possession figures for the round of 16 games:

Germany 63% Sweden 37%
Argentina 51% Mexico 49%
England 49% Ecuador 51%
Portugal 38% Holland 62%
Italy 41% Australia 59%
Switzerland 55% Ukraine 45%
Brazil 48% Ghana 52%
Spain 61 % France 39%

Obviously the sendings off influenced the figures in some of those games and I'm not suggesting that it enlightens the debate either way, but the fact is 6 out of 8 prevailed whilst seeing less of the ball.

I thought it was interesting

 

[London Irish]

Possession is an interesting one I think. I looked on the Official World Cup website and here are the possession figures for the round of 16 games:

Germany 63% Sweden 37%
Argentina 51% Mexico 49%
England 49% Ecuador 51%
Portugal 38% Holland 62%
Italy 41% Australia 59%
Switzerland 55% Ukraine 45%
Brazil 48% Ghana 52%
Spain 61 % France 39%

Obviously the sendings off influenced the figures in some of those games and I'm not suggesting that it enlightens the debate either way, but the fact is 6 out of 8 prevailed whilst seeing less of the ball.

I thought it was interesting

They are - and even more mysterious is that the BBC print possession match stats that show that Portugal, England, Germany, Argentina and Brazil each won their 2nd round games by enjoying the majority of possession in their games.

So leaving aside Ukraine (shoot-out, hence irrelevant) and Italy (huge skewing factor of 10 men against 11), it's only the Spain-France game that seems to buck the general possession-victory trend in those set of stats.

Lies, damn lies and statistics, eh?

I would concede the same as you that all this proves very little by itself - except perhaps that there might be different standards of measuring possession employed by rival statistician companies.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Frank Lampard has given England a World Cup injury scare.

The Chelsea midfielder suffered a knock on his ankle in training on Thursday and is undergoing treatment ahead of the quarter-final clash with Portugal.

He has struggled for top goalscoring form in Germany but is a key part of Sven-Goran Eriksson's plans.

Portugal have injury concerns of their own, with Cristiano Ronaldo still hopeful of shaking off his thigh injury in time for the game.