Would have went for Gerrard myself... It will be interesting to hear the exact reasoning behind the choice. Particularly considering the nation was split almost 50/50. My personal preference is that a captain should be a central midfield player whenever possible, so he can influence the entire field from his natural position. Regardless, congratulation to Terry.
It's a good choice. Both are natural leaders who command respect, and there is hardly anything to choose between the two. Maybe Gerrard's 'Roy of the Rovers' image counted against him on this one, but it's hardly a bad person to loose out to. Probably because Gerrard will be in an attacking role so won't be as in touch with the game as a central defender will be.
Let's see if being awarded the captaincy can inspire Terry to actually perform for England, instead of his usual 'adequate' performances littered with his usual mistakes. Even if Gerrard was given an attacking role, he'd still be in touch with more of the game, field and players than Terry would.
i agree, i think both him and steven have not really performed at their club level for england i think terry has more cover at chelsea though and gerrard a more free role at liverpool so i guess it differs alot would like to see a defensive mid played for extra cover
It doesn't matter what club I'm a fan of, Gerrard is the best man for the job by a distance. Head and shoulders above anyone else as a player, and head and shoulders above anyone else we have as captain.
Not english but was watching this decision Isn't it possible that Terry was picked because he'll be an automatic starter when healthy while Gerrard or Lamps might get left out in favor of a dmid?
Interesting article on why Terry is maybe a better choice than Gerrard. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8305-2304770,00.html 'Yet Gerrard’s strength, what he gives to Liverpool as captain, is precisely what England does not need: Roy of the Rovers. His inspiration is that of a force of nature, everywhere at once, winning tackles, scoring goals, dragging his team-mates back into contention through sheer willpower. This makes him incredible to watch and, rightly, a legend on Merseyside but, at international level, it does not succeed. With the exception of the one-man show that was Diego Maradona’s Argentina, the best national teams thrive on team-work. Great players such as Ronaldo, Zinédine Zidane or Ruud Gullit will make the difference in key matches, but in a game as technical and tactical as international football, the unit is what matters. England failed in Germany because the team were less than the sum of their individual parts, particularly in what should have been a stellar midfield — and Gerrard was part of that. What he needs now is direction, not a glorified role that encourages the belief that matches can be won solo. Beckham played the part of captain fantastic wonderfully against Greece in 2001, but on how many other occasions did he disappoint, even when clearly trying his hardest? The best service McClaren could do Gerrard now is to place him in a midfield that works, rather than burdening him with a job that will only heighten the belief that he is England’s saviour. '
I agree with Teso Dos Bichos here. While not denying any of Terry's qualities as a player, it just makes more sense to make a central midfielder the captain. While Terry's performances for Chelsea over the last few years have been outstanding, due largely to his position, he hasn't shown the ability to will his team to victory in the way Gerrard has. Whether we're talking about the CL final in 2005, Cup final this year, the Olympiakos game 2 years ago, or many, many others, Gerrard has shown an astounding penchant for carrying the entire team on his shoulders against opposition of the highest level. Now, if England were playing in the final of the 2008 Euro, and were down by a goal, would you really expect Terry to rally the team, leading with his own example and scoring a last minute equaliser from 30 yards out?
I don't know. Italy really seemed to struggle with Cannavaro carrying the armband in the WC. Clearly only offensive players who score goals should be considered.
Italy played anti-football and won through luck. If you believe that England should play catennaccio, then yeah, it makes perfect sense that a central defender should captain a team whose main concern is to keep the opposition from scoring, while hoping that luck or referees will help them score.
I miss Michael. I hate Newcastle but I love them when he plays. I just want him to score. I wonder if he was fit if they would consider him. I'm sure Roeder would have named him the Tooon skipper instead of Parker. They still sing song about him in Madrid.
I don't think Maclaren wouldhave named Owen captain even if he had been fit. Asside from both Terry or Gerrard (either would have been a perfectly acceptable choice) being better leaders than him, naming Owen would also be sticking with a Sven decision.
Either would have done for me, there was nothing in it, although I favoured and expected Terry to get the job, as he is better equipped as a leader, whereas Stevie is the more gifted player! John leads with endeavour, Steve with inspiration! If as we are hearing, El Wankstain is gonna be named the England number 2 tomorrow and if as I would suspect, he was consulted by McSven, then it was a one sided affair, as ET would like to have JT's babies, judging by the way he babbles on about him.....
I would have been tempted by Gerrard, but it's not a surprising decision. Certainly I'm far happier with one of these two, than having Beckham and Owen as captains when they do not have the role at club level let alone the footballing personalities for it.
Terry is the better leader, but the only reason why I wouldn't have handed him the captaincy is because he doesn't perform as well for country as he does for club. Maybe the armband will kickstart some great "Cannavaro-like" performances and underline McClaren's decision but at this moment I would have picked Gerrard without even blinking.
Oh Michael Owen was the vice skipper under Sven so he should never be considered yea. There isn't an English striker close to Boy Wonder. Yes, he is not a natural leader but he leads by example. Cannavoro is Italy's skipper but he wasn't the club skipper. But yea I would pick Terry then Gerrard then St. Michael. So good start to the regime
Gerrard would have been a better skipper because of his centeral midfield position. i think that difenders strikers and especially golies shuld never be captains. Terry would be able to lead by example or vocally when a team is 1-0 down in the final of something or it doesnt matter where Gerrard could. But this is all pointless cuz he can still do the same thing he doesnt need a silly armband to do it...
Salt of the Earth, that Terry lad. Excellent choice, though young Gerrard would have been quite fine for me also. I expect Terry won out, because of what McSven perceived as better leadership in the dressing room. Nothing against Gerrard, but Terry seems to me, to be more able/willing/capable to get stuck into anyone that needs it, in the dressing room, or on the pitch.