walcott goes in the book of the dead,
the rest were well below par,
we draw a line in the sand on
terrys shaggin of celopatra.
right, im off...
Well until we scored thought we we're diabolical and looked totally out of depth; but soon as Carrick & Crouch came on totally changed the game and the only winner was going be England; shame no Shawcross but I suspected he wouldn't get a bit of a run
He made one pass. ALL HAIL GERRARD!
Is he, dare I say it, over rated??
far from Diabolical, thats what SCOTLAND have to deal with. We we're PANTS but not all that bad, if Fat FRank had scored early on with that GOLDEN chance the whole complexity of the game would've changed.
I think theres some sorta pressure on the players to perform better against the lower teams than the bigger teams sometimes "Oh shit its 25mins into the first half and we hav'nt scored yet...PANIC" springs to mind!
as we learned from alf ramsey its not about having the best players, but the best team. time to drop rooney and stevie g and let's win the world cup.
Based on this performance the team should be
?
? ? ? ?
? Carrick Barry Milner
Rooney ?
Subs: Crouch ? ? ? ? ? ?
The only English players that were really naff were Gerrard and Lampard.
u have look at that. you may be suprised.
11 in 39.
Not all that good.
The only player we should have ever built an England team around was Matt Le Tissier. I am sure I read that Pele stated he would have won 100 caps if he was Brasilian.
Pele also said the Nicky Butt was the best player in the World. The bloke has a history of being a complete idiot when commenting on football.
He said he was the best player at the 2002 World Cup, which is a bit different, and he was definetely one of the best
Indeed. And Crouch can hold the ball up and works hard, two things i've never seen Defoe do.