Well, thanks Sven.

[Marshy]

Oh blimey, a psycho-analysis from LI. I'm sure I'm not worthy.

If abject mediocrity was the target under Sven, then by christ we've passed that with flying colours. The benchmark for England success now seems to be qualification, and the Quarter Finals. And playing shit to get there is fine because, well, the results are the important thing and we'll just keep telling ourselves we'll play better soon.

I'm sorry if I'm a little frustrated, but the fact is, we made hard work of a feeble qualifying group to get to Germany. We then scraped wins against Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago and Ecuador, and then bombed out against a garbage Portugal side. And that makes us a "player" on the World stage again ? Do me a favour. We've played crap football throughout, and I'm frankly sick of people excusing it all and telling me that we should just be grateful to be there. Its bollocks. We have the players to do a damn sight better than that, but for a coach who had NO CLUE how to organise, galvanise, motivate or even pick a damn squad that would give us some bloody OPTIONS when it (predictably) started going tits up.

Graham Taylor was hopeless, but there was a real dirge of talent at the time, as many of the key players of the squad of 1990 were reaching the end of their careers. Keegan had more to choose from, but was a hopeless tactician. Hoddles team was shaping up well, and we were very unlucky to go out in 1998. Eriksson was supposedly brought in as some master tactician, and certainly had the players to make a real impact, but he has been exposed as a complete charlatan who couldn't make an effective tactical change if his life depended on it.

Oh yeah, but we qualified. Great. We then utterly stank the place out, but I guess thats our standing on the world stage eh. Lets just accept it and count how fortunate we were to have the genius of Eriksson bestowed upon our humble squad for 6 years. Boy, we came so far under him didn't we.

Couldnt agree more.

 

[London Calling]

Easy Easy Easy

 

[Weezle]

you must have been salivating waiting to make that post. You seem unwilling to see that we had a set of players who could have done something. And this was combined with a draw that we could only dream of. And this was all f***ed up by a manager who was unable to make a team of his players. But for you this was the same old England. Well to be honest I too have seen the same old England - time after time after 1970 - and this time, for once, I believed we did have players that, in the right position, with the right luck - would have lifted the trophy. I am not a person to be carried along by hype - but this set of players should have gone all the way.

The same old postings you make about the same old England may apply from now - but for this World Cup they should have been off the mark. But Sven f***ed it up.

(and of course the FA and the players take responsibility as well - but that was his set of players and his players).

SPOT ON POST! I am GUTTED! This England team had EVERYTHING that was needed to win the world cup except a manager. Sven has rinced this country of money, picked an unbalanced squad and conspired to be uninspirational and inept time after time. Most of the other managers at the world cup would have won the world cup with our team. If Scolari or Mourinho were in charge we'd have won it.

This was the best group of England players i have EVER seen and i can now say that i no longer believe in ENGLAND and i don't EVER think they will win jack shit. I am dissolusioned beyond belief!

 

[Pavilionaire]

One of the points to emerge from the World Cup is the extent to which we were let down by Lampard and Beckham.

The former could not have had a worse tournament if he had tried, and all this with the much called-for holding midfielder behind him to cut him loose - some threat!

As for the latter, his form apart from the odd free-kick was non-existant and he singularly failed as a captain to transmit Sven's tactics to the players on the pitch.

Therefore, I think Sven can feel let down by his players but then he had other options in Lennon, Walcott and Jenas that he either under-utilised or didn't use at all.

All in all, not a disaster but a huge disappointment.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Graham Taylor was hopeless, but there was a real dirge of talent at the time, as many of the key players of the squad of 1990 were reaching the end of their careers.

Not that many.

Butcher and Shilton called it a day.

Defence, well Stuart Pearce was still in his 20's, as were Walker, Parker and Wright.

Midfield, Gazza and Platt were still young, Waddle still had 3 or so years in him as did Barnes.

Up front Lineker was only around 30 as was Beardsley.

What Taylor could not be blamed for was losing Gazza for over a year. However his refusal to pick Beardsley and Waddle was stupid and some of the other players he brought in was madness.

Also he had Shearer and Sheringham coming through at this time.

 

[Pavilionaire]

The weird thing about Taylor is that he probably talks more sense on FiveLive than practically any other pundit.

In terms of England managers since Sir Alf (bar caretakers) I'd say the pecking order was:

1. El Tel - Quality. His record pisses on everyone else - 1 defeat in 23.

2. Bobby Robson - Decent

3. Hoddle, Greenwood, Sven - all on a par. Average

4. Taylor / Keegan - poor

5. Revie - Disaster.

 

[Easy 10]

What Taylor could not be blamed for was losing Gazza for over a year.

Although even when Gazza was fit and available, he selected GORDON COWANS ahead of him for a qualifier in Ireland.
Unreal.

 

[Easy 10]

1. El Tel - Quality. His record pisses on everyone else - 1 defeat in 23.

The vast majority were friendlies though - the only competative games we played under Venables were during Euro 96, all at Wembley. He's a good coach, but you can't read too much into his stats as an England manager.

 

[keaton]

The weird thing about Taylor is that he probably talks more sense on FiveLive than practically any other pundit.

In terms of England managers since Sir Alf (bar caretakers) I'd say the pecking order was:

1. El Tel - Quality. His record pisses on everyone else - 1 defeat in 23.

2. Bobby Robson - Decent

3. Hoddle, Greenwood, Sven - all on a par. Average

4. Taylor / Keegan - poor

5. Revie - Disaster.

Venables is a very over-rated manager. We were at home in Euro 96 and we failed to win it. We couldn't beat Switzerland and were very lucky to beat Scotland and draw with Spain.

 

[Brovion]

Not that many.

Butcher and Shilton called it a day.

Defence, well Stuart Pearce was still in his 20's, as were Walker, Parker and Wright.

Midfield, Gazza and Platt were still young, Waddle still had 3 or so years in him as did Barnes.

Up front Lineker was only around 30 as was Beardsley.

What Taylor could not be blamed for was losing Gazza for over a year. However his refusal to pick Beardsley and Waddle was stupid and some of the other players he brought in was madness.

Also he had Shearer and Sheringham coming through at this time.

Spot on as usual U.B. The perfect riposte to all those who maintain that the current squad is the 'best ever' when really it's just 'pretty good individuals but not really a balanced team and Sven didn't help'.

And the 1990 team were better at penalties, even though we didn't think so at the time!

(And I'm sorry if that pisses of the 'Golden Generation' brigade, but if you look at it objectively you know it's true.)

 

[1066gull]

thanks for leaving us from where you began

 

[keaton]

thanks for leaving us from where you began

Apart from now we're in the top group of seeds for qualifiers when we were in the second one before.
And we've got to the quarter finals of three tournaments in a row for the first time since 1972.
Oh and a fair few promising youngsters who've had international experience.
And a left winger

 

[Pavilionaire]

Keaton, do me a favour! Sven himself has admitted the QFs was an under-achievment for this group of players.

Considering we have some top coaches like Ferguson, Mourinho, Wenger, Jol and Benitez turning out some excellent players Sven has done bugger all with some excellent materials at his disposal.

 

[Easy 10]

I'd give up Pav.
Apparently we've done wonders under Sven, and reaching the Quarter Finals of these tournaments is actually something to be very, very proud of.

No wonder we english are a perennial bunch of losers in sport, when so many people are obviously content with this level of "achievement".

 

[Uncle Buck]

I'd give up Pav.
Apparently we've done wonders under Sven, and reaching the Quarter Finals of these tournaments is actually something to be very, very proud of.

No wonder we english are a perennial bunch of losers in sport, when so many people are obviously content with this level of "achievement".

Not sure that has really been said.

Ultimately even I will admitt that we have fallen short under him.

However compared with the mess he took over we have moved forward, just not as far forward as we should have done with the players we have.

But you stick to your interpretation by all means.

 

[Easy 10]

Not sure that has really been said.

Ultimately even I will admitt that we have fallen short under him.

However compared with the mess he took over we have moved forward, just not as far forward as we should have done with the players we have.

But you stick to your interpretation by all means.

Thanks, I will.

For the record, he did well in his honeymoon period in helping to turn round and rescue that 2002 World Cup qualifying campaign. Other than that though, we've completed stagnated over the last 4 years. A criminal waste of the talent we've had come through during that time.

 

[London Irish]

Oh blimey, a psycho-analysis from LI. I'm sure I'm not worthy.

If abject mediocrity was the target under Sven, then by christ we've passed that with flying colours. The benchmark for England success now seems to be qualification, and the Quarter Finals. And playing shit to get there is fine because, well, the results are the important thing and we'll just keep telling ourselves we'll play better soon.

I'm sorry if I'm a little frustrated, but the fact is, we made hard work of a feeble qualifying group to get to Germany. We then scraped wins against Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago and Ecuador, and then bombed out against a garbage Portugal side. And that makes us a "player" on the World stage again ? Do me a favour. We've played crap football throughout, and I'm frankly sick of people excusing it all and telling me that we should just be grateful to be there. Its bollocks. We have the players to do a damn sight better than that, but for a coach who had NO CLUE how to organise, galvanise, motivate or even pick a damn squad that would give us some bloody OPTIONS when it (predictably) started going tits up.

Graham Taylor was hopeless, but there was a real dirge of talent at the time, as many of the key players of the squad of 1990 were reaching the end of their careers. Keegan had more to choose from, but was a hopeless tactician. Hoddles team was shaping up well, and we were very unlucky to go out in 1998. Eriksson was supposedly brought in as some master tactician, and certainly had the players to make a real impact, but he has been exposed as a complete charlatan who couldn't make an effective tactical change if his life depended on it.

Oh yeah, but we qualified. Great. We then utterly stank the place out, but I guess thats our standing on the world stage eh. Lets just accept it and count how fortunate we were to have the genius of Eriksson bestowed upon our humble squad for 6 years. Boy, we came so far under him didn't we.

The flaws in this pub bore rant are too numerous to mention but I'll highlight just the most egregious two:

1) Portugal are not a "garbage" team - they were Euro 2004 finalists and are now semi-finalists on merit having put out the likes of Holland

2) England did not "stink the tournament out" - but were unbeaten and only unluckily lost on penalties against a decent team.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Thanks, I will.

For the record, he did well in his honeymoon period in helping to turn round and rescue that 2002 World Cup qualifying campaign. Other than that though, we've completed stagnated over the last 4 years. A criminal waste of the talent we've had come through during that time.

So even from what you have said there, he has taken us forward, so I am right in saying just not as far forward as he should have done with the players he had at his disposal.

 

[Easy 10]

The flaws in this pub bore rant are too numerous to mention but I'll highlight just the most egregious two:

1) Portugal are not a "garbage" team - they were Euro 2004 finalists and are now semi-finalists on merit having put out the likes of Holland

The Deco-less Portugal we faced were utter cack, L I. Even when we were down to 10, they could barely muster a decent attack. Any half decent team worth their salt would've turned that lot over comfortably during the 90 - lets see what France do to them tomorrow.

2) England did not "stink the tournament out" - but were unbeaten and only unluckily lost on penalties against a decent team.

Ahh, the old "unlucky loss on penalties" mantra again. We've not heard that one before, have we. And yes, I think we did indeed stink the tournament out, because aside from a bright start against Paraguay, and one half against Sweden, we could barely string three passes together. It was more of the usual safety-first tactics which must have absolutely bored the tits off any neutral unfortunate enough to be watching our games. Unbeaten perhaps, but when we look back on the great games (or even mildly entertaining games) of the tournament, Englands will be somewhere between Ukraine v Switzerland and Japan v Croatia.

 

[Parson Henry]

Is this the Buckmeister pinning his colours to the Flag of the Capital Irishman to take on the Easy Rider?

Who-ho!