James - BARTHEZ Johny Puelo, you posted this comparison on 10/25. Barthez is in France trying to find a starting place. Tim Howard has been the first side keeper for United for well over a month. Trying to ignore the fact that a US citizen is keeping goal for United is absurd. Your post should have read: James - HOWARD Difficult as it is to believe, the third choice keeper for the States is better than the first choice keeper for England.
It's possibly a little bit early to say he's better, but he's certainly good, there can be no doubt about that.
You're right. I wasn't intentionally ignoring Howard, I just wasn't sure if he had been starting for United on a consistent basis.
At the same time, Solksjaer and Neville, Phil (at least not as you suggest) have not been regular starters for Manchester United either. Solskjaer has been either hurt or ineffective this season. Christiano Ronaldo and Kleberson have both played on the right more frequently than Neville. While Neville plays frequently, it is generally in central midfield or as a fullback. So I think maybe you should re-think the pairings against Beckham and Rooney. Although to be honest, Manchester United has not played a second striker/orthodox center forward this season. Forlan (gasp) is the closest thing, next to Van Nistelrooy. Part of the advantage that Manchester United has against England is their style of play, though. Roy Keane may not be as good as he once was, but the combination of Keane and Scholes is as solid as it gets at the club level. And the way that Manchester United plays from touchline to touchline through Giggs and Ronaldo is miles more advanced than any width that England draws out of Ashley Cole and even David Beckham, since he tends to drift in as much as play wide due to SGE's tactics. Finally, Manchester United's link-up play through Mikael Silvestre and John O'Shea (and the other two England defenders) is much smoother than England's is. Ashley Cole does not partner particularly well with the midfielder in front of him and Sol Campball really struggles with this job. And Roy Keane is a far superior distributor of the ball than Butt, when playing in the role of anchor midfielder. I would give England an edge in depth and quality at forward (although Van Nistelrooy is very effective at manufacturing chances as a lone striker, so he negates some of this advantage) and an edge in depth and quality at central defense. But the Manchester United midfield play and overall fluency is definitely superior to England. They generate far more chances and are superior in possession to the national team. And Manchester United has a clearly superior goalkeeper.
OK, maybe I should watch more Man. United matches. It wouldn't be tough as that's all they give us over here; get the odd Arsenal game if we're lucky. I bet England could beat Fulham though...
Well - it's apples and oranges really - the helter-skelter style of the Premiership is entirely different to the type of cagey game you usually get at international level. That might have something to do with the amount of chances Man Utd create.
Well I would say that England would beat this seasons Man Utd team, who I feel are overrated and not as strong as last year. I've always felt that ManYoo do well at full strength against smaller teams, when they can get their fluency going. But struggle when they play well organised teams who can defend under pressure and finish the counter attacking chances they inevitably get. Sven's England always raise their game against quality opponents, his record in those games is formidable. It's only the friendlies and minnows who get in the way. Defensively England are far stronger than United, the midfield doesn't have the width or understanding but makes up for it in being more defensively solid and having a better range of passing, while of course Saint Michael + Rooney would have a better time against Silvestre et al. I would also rate James as being a better goalkeeper than this Howard kid, who hasn't impressed me much. Nor has he impressed Sir Alex, who by all accounts is still scouring Europe for a Barthez replacement. Certainly James is better than Keller, I have to admit that. As for Friedel, he's been poor this season, while James has been more or less impressive for the past year. Saying that I find it amusing that yet again a Yank comes into a thread and tries to hijak it into another pointless comparison with their overrated players.... The US is weak, their goalkeepers are overhyped and nothing special, just let it go already and accept it. Then we can all be friends
Okay. I guess I just don't know how to evaluate players at all. Back to the drawing board. We just get completely different accounts on the internet sites we read here . . . I guess we lose something in the translation. Maybe Fergie is just trying to buck up Howard by complimenting him publically, right? It is very manly of you to make such an 'admission', since it is clear every US fan has been trying to drag it out of you. By the way - did anyone bring up Friedal or Keller? I don't think so. Most US fans realize that Hudson is probably a tad superior to Keller at this point anyway, but like you ex-Safe Hands supporters, we tend to support a fellow who has been around the block for us a good bit. Keller is still a decent keeper, even if he is not world-class. And technically, Hudson is the third-string US keeper. Why exactly is it necessary to scour Europe (or wherever) when England's finest is ripe for the picking at a first division club? Surely Terrance Brown/Trevor Brooking would be unable to refuse a generous offering for his 31 year-old goalkeeper? I know that West Ham is more or less sorted out now, but for the good of the country shouldn't James be playing at the highest level? Oh, I forgot. Fergie is tired of players who a) model or b) are dating those who do. James fails the Barthez-Beckham-Yorke Corollary. That is likely the only reason why he is not with Manure right now. I guess the fact that Blackburn as a team has been playing miserable is no excuse for Friedel, while it was for James last season. Honest evaluators were able to recognize that West Ham's terrible goals allowed record last season was not a reflection of David James' quality. The fact that Lorenzo Amoroso and others (not to mention injuries and generally uninspired play throughout the team) have been inadequate has to be taken into consideration when evaluating Brad Friedel. But again, no one brought up Friedel before you did. He is not germane to this discussion. There is a perfectly familiar English attitude. We are inferior. We are blind to our inferiority, but we can always count on you to help us identify it. I can accept that. All is right with the world. "Methinks you are as civil as an orange, and something of that jealous complexion." Just read the play last week and your snippy comment and handle just made it irresistable. Back to the main point: Manchester United have a lot of fluency, play a sophisticated style, and their team has competed well against teams fielding Michael Owen, Wayne Rooney and even Thierry Henry (over the last two seasons in any event - and much to my displeasure). England rises to the challenge of playing some top teams and has a generally good record over the last two years. But they are dull, dull, dull and they have been hampered by some miserable goalkeeping. If David James were so good, why wasn't he the one being chipped by Ronaldinho and the vaunted Artim Sakiri? I think that many rational people could argue that Tim Howard is a quality keeper. +playing for a team that has conceded a mere 6 goals in 10 league games (and can be blamed for perhaps one of them) and has shown increasing confidence and command of his area (even on crosses, eh David James) +has fared very well in other competitions (shutout in Charity Shield, solid performances in Champions League) +has had to contend with some pretty patched together defenses (Roy Keane in central defense and Quinton Fortune at left back) +at the ripe age of 24 (when David James began forging his calamity james reputation) +after playing very little at the International level +and playing for a pitiful (third class er second division) quality league +all while cursing spontaneously and foaming at the mouth due to Tourettes' Syndrome, of course. I guess Fergie just took a flyer on him for £3million (that's post-transfer market crash money mind you) and he is going to be another Rodrigo/Bosnich/Carroll/etc and it is totally irrational to think that he is quality. And have you forgotten about that thing called European football, which Manchester United (much to my chagrin) have been fairly successful in for a number of years running? Sure they can't beat Real Madrid and Bayer Leverkusen gave them fits two years ago, but they do see competition that is a little different from the hurly burly or helter skelter or whatever term you use to describe the premiership and adapt to it relatively well. You are probably right that England would beat Man Utd, who are weaker than they were last season. But the more likely result is another dismal draw and a few wins for each team. After all, Man Utd would surely be flummoxed by cagey teams like Lichtenstein and wouldn't know where to begin when facing powerhouse teams like Macedonia, whose scored directly off a stinking corner kick, right? And wasn't that cagey team composed mostly of (Macedonian) domestic players and a Nationwide first divison striker (that Georgi Hristov is a good one, eh Barnsley fans) - players from club teams (don't yer call 'em minnows, Orange?) that Man Utd generally crush (if they even make it far enough into the European Cups to face Man Utd). Slovakia is no powerhouse, either. And even though Turkey is a strong side, its not like they have been on very good form recently themselves. Of the teams that England has played recently, which of these do you think would give Manchester United more than they can handle? Turkey, could beat them frequently. But otherwise, I think Man Utd would do very much as well as Eng-er-land and likely a good bit better.
A better question is -- is James better than Hudson, because if James couldn't beat out Hudson, England really is in bad shape.
Good grief. Clearly you haven't learnt the simple lesson to be interesting when posting, not mindlessly dull and uninformed. England are a top side and of the games you picked out, remind me how many of those England lost? Ahh none Laugh at Macedonia all you want, they'd beat your US team easily and were unlucky to be edged out by a single goal in both matches against the talented Turks. Besides as pointed out England may not win as comfortably as ManYoo do agains the minnows, where the motivation and energy levels are lacking, but in the big games they lift themselves. As for James, quality shines through regardless of where he's playing. Besides if you actually bothered to read around before diving in feet first into the thread then you may have noticed that the point has already been made that if James isn't up to scratch, then there are others like Robinson who can step in to take his place. Overhype your little Timmy all you want mate, he's nothing special and if you want to witter on endlessly about him in your lovesick puppy style then I suggest you do it in a place where people may actually be interested. i.e. the Yank forums. No-one outside the US cares about your mediocre players unless they play for their club, or until eventually one of them emerges with some genuine talent (but don't hold your breath for that or start obsessing over 14 year old boys). Just learn to accept your place in the football world and stop boring us with your pathetic obsession in trying to compare the US and England. There is no comparison between the class and passion of England and the puny wannabes in America. By the way, Sir Alex is well known for praising his goalkeepers in public, regardless of the situation, in fact even at the end of last season after the Madrid games he was still insisting to the media that Barthez was World Class and he still had full confidence in him (!) Sir Alex is renowned for his mind games and also toying with the truth in the media. I appreciate that for individuals like you over in the US you only want the impressions of your players that are edited and marketed to fit your nationalistic tastes, but if that's the only way you can see things then it doesn't say much for your intellect. Howard has not yet been a disaster, but neither is he "making waves" and getting more "respect" for the US. His case certainly isn't helped by the blinkered ranting of fanatics such as yourself. Cheers!
No its not. Take it back. England wouldn't be in bad shape with a one-legged goalkeeper. In fact, David Seaman could play until he is sixty-five and England would still be a top ten team (and better than the yanks) because they have so much quality throughout the squad. Besides, Chris Kirkland is one spine replacement away from being the next Peter Shilton! And didn't you hear, Paul Robinsion scored a goal against Swindon Town the other week. Too bad he gets to be the next England keeper to drop into Division 1. At this rate, maybe Liverpool should sell Kirkland. I would hate to see the pattern continue next season. England's football heritage is such that it carries them through matches all by itself. You didn't see an England team out of ideas against Brazil did you? It was their sense of fair play that prevented them from taking advantage of the fact that they had a man advantage. (You Eng-er-land fans want to know who called a performance by Kasey Keller the "greatest goalkeeping performance he had ever seen?" That would be the stymied Romario after the US team beat the full Brazil team in the Gold Cup competition in 1999. When is the last time ya'll have done that? Oh yeah - and back in 1994 when we played an even better Brazil team in the World Cup, we only lost 1 - 0 and they played stinking dirty in that game). Their genius Scandinavian coach is never tactically flummoxed by anyone. England has so much depth at every other position that they don't even need a left midfielder or even a left-footed midfielder. They can just contract the midfield into the middle of the field (with time and pressure, perhaps they can turn Nicky Butt into a diamond. Or maybe Owen Hargreaves if you listen to Wildman90210.) and let Ashley Cole do whatever it is he does up and down the left side of the field. Because he is pure class. Darius Vassell and Wayne Rooney and James Beattie and Michael Owen will be running rings around any striker that the US produces for the next fifteen years (And yet good old, much-maligned Emile Heskey will continue to get his share of starts). Nicky Butt will continue to get the plaudits from Pele, Steven Gerrard will never be injured again and Frank Lampard is clearly the next Gazza. David Dunn and Joe Cole will play the role of his understudies and will be so inspired by his brilliance that Joe will count his lucky stars that he gets to have a locker near him at Chelsea FC and David Dunn will brag to his grandchildren about polishing his boots. Sol Campball could never complete another pass in his life, yet he will still have more class in his pinky finger than Carlos Bocanegra. And Rio Ferdinand and Jonathan Woodgate are pants (even though it is the ancient Gareth Southgate who has probably been England's best defender in recent performances). Matthew Upson will hardly get in the team, England has so much depth. But for some reason, people like Fergie and Houllier are signing up Yank central defenders to their youth teams. Oh well. Gotta stoke the fire - it will get those yanks goats when Whitbred and Spector turn out to be the next incarnation of Jovan Kirovski and John Thorrington! The fact that Yanks are even allowed on Bigsoccer is a marvel in and of itself. We should bow down in homage to the mighty England team - even though its probably not as good as Wales. The US team may never be as good as England, but at least we won't be a collective pile of underachievers with the smuggest fans in the world. If we could beat you in 1950, we will beat you again.
James is currently in better form than any US goalkeeper. Maybe you should try watching the games, rather than picturing them in your head? Now the even better question is -- is Reyna better than Joey Barton, because if the captain and key player for the US can't beat out an inexperienced 21 year old, then the US really is in bad shape
Sendorange, don't assume that because I currently live in the US that I am "a Yank". I am, in fact, both multi-national and multi-cultural. Neither am I trying to "hijack" the thread. I was pointing out that anyone having seen United this season would be aware of the fact that Tim Howard is now their first side keeper. Offering an opinion without having seen United recently is pointless. The US keepers are not overhyped. Three of them are good enough to be starting in the EPL. All three are, in my opinion, better than the current England keeper. None of them is as good as Oliver Kahn. United should be looking for another keeper because Carroll is weak and there is no telling if Howard's body or psyche can endure the rigor of a full season of play in the Premiership and Champions League. No other US player is capable of playing for England. The US national team is not weak. No country that is among the top twenty in the world is weak. They are not, as their most ardent supporters believe, a top ten side. Being a WC quarterfinalist doesn't make them one of the eight best any more than it places France or Argentina outside the top two dozen. The current ranking of 12th is fair enough. I doubt the current United side could beat England. I think Beckham is the primary difference.
LOL But you already have a significant number of the smuggest and most self-congratulatory fans in the world! You could give lectures, hold tutorials etc...The only positive thing for US soccer is that for every puffed-up clueless tool, there is at least one or two realistic fans who know what they're talking about and understand the game. Unfortunately you're the former not the latter. Look at you, taking a Gold Cup match as a highlight of achievement, then making reference to a freak result in 1950 as some sign of impending future progress. You're a good laugh mate
Relax, I'm just baiting the people who are all to ready to distort this thread into another US Vs England obsession. You've made some rational points in an intelligent fashion, in fact with your footballing knowledge on top of that someone could almost mistake you for a Mexican!
What a bold statement I made in claiming that Tim Hudson is a "quality player". Especially since in the very same post I compliment David James. And I didn't even praise Friedel or Keller or any other US player, so you can dispense with that "all you want to do is puff up your players in nationalistic fashion" routine. You grouchy limeys are so sensitive about US fans that you take offense where none is given. We don't care about your dull, boring, underachieving team anymore than you care about our raw, unproven one.
You lousy England fans sure try to get a lot of mileage out of your one freak home World Cup win. The point about 1950 or Gold Cup is that even lousy, non-pedigreed teams (do you think I am arguing that we are great??!!??) can achieve great results. It is not like there is some cataclysmic level between England or US or Macedonia (as you like to point out). In fact, Germany and Brazil are the only true World juggernauts who have been dominant era after era after era. And Italy and Argentina are a tier down from them. After that, England, France, Holland, Spain and a host of other countries are in a murky middle as teams that can get great results in top international competitions. You can dispute it if you like, but USA, Korea and other nations are in that pot. And what exactly have I done that shows a complete lack of knowledge on any aspect of my comparison of ManUtd and England or on my appeal to the fact that Tim Hudson is a "quality keeper" which is the only claim I made? Matt Clark is the first one to say that Man Utd was a better team than England. Is he some wet-behind the-ears Yank? How were any of those positions outrageous? Just because I support my country and call one of our burgeoning young players "quality" and don't think that Ashley Cole is the best thing ever on a left foot doesn't make me football idiot.
You've found me out, Sendorange, at least in part. I am also part Columbian. Those two parts of my being are currently in heated debate over the merits of Campos and Higuita. Both of whom, by the way, are better than anyone currently playing for England or the US. I prefer that my keepers possess the testicular fortitude to range far from the goalmouth, the taste embrace brilliant color and the stylistic sense to jeri curl their hair.
Boy oh boy, the same lads that have accused me of trolling to the same with regard to the American keepers in the Premiership...tsk tsk tsk. It seems that there is a double standard around here. It's okay to make mockery of the American keepers, but point out a few FACTS about the top teams in Europe and the hounds come after you with the fangs drooling. I may have to post some more facts again to set some things straight.
Because he posted an opinion which was based on sound reasoning, not some mindless Yank-centric rant. You need to learn the difference between the two. It's ok to support your country and defend its players, but not to such an idiotic degree and without the knowledge of the game to back it up. LOL you don't care about us, yet here you are posting away in the England forum?
Liverpool, I think you will find some things of interest on the thread below that will support who the top performers have been in Europe. Let's not get bullied around. https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/newreply.php?s=&action=newreply&postid=1747381
So great Orange fountain of wisdom. What is it again that makes England better than Manchester United? The win over Macedonia or the win over Lichtenstein, or is it the draw over Turkey? When Germany barely beats a team like Scotland or Iceland, the nation wants Rudi Voeller's head on a platter. But you somehow make these close matches into some kind of badge of honor. Manchester United plays football with far more fluency than England. (And like I said earlier in the thread) Man Utd are weaker in defense and don't have the depth in the attack. But their link-up play is far superior and their midfield play is better as well. The combination of Giggs, Scholes, Keane and just about anybody is still more effective (even if not so talented) as the diamond that England currently fields. Discuss.