Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Rio Ferdinand



Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
31,278
Genuinly believe Kings lack of experience in Europe and playing in top matches for England will be a problem in the latter stages. Inexperience is fine with attacking players, at the heart of your back four its a problem. 10 times worse if we end up with Upson in the back four at some stage.

Have you forgotten how Terry and King 'owned' a world-class France side in Euro 2004?

If Ledley will have any problems, experience will be the least of them.
 




Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
58,794
hassocks
Have you forgotten how Terry and King 'owned' a world-class France side in Euro 2004?

If Ledley will have any problems, experience will be the least of them.

It wasnt him and Terry, He played instead of Terry.

Who somehow took Kings place the next game.
 




Jackthelad

Well-known member
Mar 31, 2010
1,075
Have no idea how or why Him and Green are in the squad

Green is ok he should not be number 1 Hart should be. The one player who England should of got from West Ham was Scott Parker who has been one of the best Mid's all season should of been back up for Barry and sent SWP home!
 


Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patron
Jul 16, 2003
58,794
hassocks
Green is ok he should not be number 1 Hart should be. The one player who England should of got from West Ham was Scott Parker who has been one of the best Mid's all season should of been back up for Barry and sent SWP home!

I think Parker should of gone

I just dont rate Green, Would have taken Robinson as he has been great this season
 




Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,983
Surrey
All of our goalkeepers have got "untimely clanger" written all over them. That goes for Robinson too, IMO.
 


Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
31,278
It wasnt him and Terry, He played instead of Terry.

Who somehow took Kings place the next game.

Fair point - it was Campbell and King, but the key was King's brilliance that night.

Presumably, if Dawson replaces Rio then our first choice centre-back is...Sol? Or do they have to be from the 30? Knowing England, 7 back-ups between now and the start of the tournament won't be enough.
 






Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
31,278
I just had a look at the England side that lost to France in Euro 2004:

1. James (6 years younger)
2. Neville, G - when still good
3. Cole, A
4. King
5. Campbell
6. Beckham
7. Gerrard
8. Lampard
9. Scholes
10. Rooney
11. Owen.

I'd argue that's as good a side as we've fielded since WC '90 and, more signifcantly, better than our present side.
 




Statto

007
Nov 11, 2005
4,317
Graceland Memphis
This is by no means a disaster. We have cover at centre back. Id be more concerned if it was an injury to Rooney, Lamps, Gerrard, or Ashley Cole.
 






Lewes' best seagull

New member
Jan 31, 2008
1,145
I just had a look at the England side that lost to France in Euro 2004:

1. James (6 years younger)
2. Neville, G - when still good
3. Cole, A
4. King
5. Campbell
6. Beckham
7. Gerrard
8. Lampard
9. Scholes
10. Rooney
11. Owen.

I'd argue that's as good a side as we've fielded since WC '90 and, more signifcantly, better than our present side.

That's a very good side. Definitely better than at the moment.
 


The Wizard

Well-known member
Jul 2, 2009
18,401
I just had a look at the England side that lost to France in Euro 2004:

1. James (6 years younger)
2. Neville, G - when still good
3. Cole, A
4. King
5. Campbell
6. Beckham
7. Gerrard
8. Lampard
9. Scholes
10. Rooney
11. Owen.

I'd argue that's as good a side as we've fielded since WC '90 and, more signifcantly, better than our present side.
Definitely a better side but we didn't have a great manager did we.
 








nwgull

Well-known member
Jul 25, 2003
14,533
Manchester
I just had a look at the England side that lost to France in Euro 2004:

1. James (6 years younger)
2. Neville, G - when still good
3. Cole, A
4. King
5. Campbell
6. Beckham
7. Gerrard
8. Lampard
9. Scholes
10. Rooney
11. Owen.

I'd argue that's as good a side as we've fielded since WC '90 and, more signifcantly, better than our present side.

very good side that actually did quite well after that first game, we probably would have gone alot further if Rooney hadn't got injured after about 15 mins in the game against Portugal.
 


Spanish Seagulls

Well-known member
Nov 18, 2007
2,915
Ladbroke Grove
I just had a look at the England side that lost to France in Euro 2004:

1. James (6 years younger)
2. Neville, G - when still good
3. Cole, A
4. King
5. Campbell
6. Beckham
7. Gerrard
8. Lampard
9. Scholes
10. Rooney
11. Owen.

I'd argue that's as good a side as we've fielded since WC '90 and, more signifcantly, better than our present side.

Besides Neville, Beckham & Scholes that is the current England side. Maybe James will or won't play & Beckham may well have done if fit but that to me is the same bloody side.
 




Pavilionaire

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
31,278
Definitely a better side but we didn't have a great manager did we.

We'll find out how great Capello really is. Even Sven won the Italian Championship.

Using that 2004 side as a yardstick, and assuming King will come in for Rio, we're weaker defensively and haven't got the dead ball threat, but we have got pace out wide and we have got Fabio...
 


vegster

Sanity Clause
May 5, 2008
28,274
Blessing in disguise..?


Very much so, Duckface has not played or played well consistently for club or country this season. He has a back " problem " which seems to defy treatment and is ongoing which makes the situation worse. To be honest, he does drop clangers on a regular basis and I'd be more than happy for Dawson to step up and fill the CB role.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here