Assuming we're talking about 4-4-2, (which I'm not convinced about), what about these... ........................Robinson Neville.........Carra (Yes, I know)........Terry.. .....Bridge Beckham.....Hargreaves.....Gerrard.. ...J Cole ..................Heskey......Owen or... ........................James Richards.........Rio........King......A.Cole SWP.....Lampard.....Barry .......Rooney ..................Bent......Johnson In other words I reckon we could put out TWO sides, both of which are capable of giving any side a game on their day. TBH I doubt they'd be any worse than what we've seen over the past few years and probably a lot better.
not so sure about Rooney on thew left wing, but deffinately an futher forward attacking midfielder, taking out Johnson on the second line up. Then replace him with Downing, who on Football manager does excellent
TBH the exact makeup of the squad isn't important. It's the idea that we could probably put out a number of sides that would do well IF we could get them playing with some confidence. I think what happened to Heskey in the past is indicative of what I'm talking about. I saw Alan Mullery talking about him and he was saying that he hadn't scored enough goals when he was in the England team, he shouldn't be in the squad. Note: not the starting 11... the SQUAD!! Like I pointed out before, it's true that Heskey's only scored 5 goals in 43 caps BUT 17 of those 43 were as substitute so that's 26 and many of THOSE were as a left winger 'doing a job for the team'. I don't think the guy's a natural goalscorer but he is a good foil for someone who is. As you say, Rooney on the left isn't ideal. I got the idea from where Barcelona play Ronaldinho which is, nominally at least, on the left. The thing is JC often drifts from his position so it's not much of a change in a sense.
Keep the same squad.. Heskey is out possibly.. Slot Rooney in , play the 4-4-2 we are playing, and the results will continue to come.. ---------------Robinson-------------------- Richards-----Rio--------Terry-------Cole ----------------Barry------------------ SWP/Lennon----------------------Cole ----------------Gerrard------------- --------------Rooney -----------------Owen
-----------------carson------------------ ------------king--------terry------------- -richards------------------------shorey- ------------------barry------------------- -lennon--------------------------j. cole- -----------------gerrard----------------- ------------owen------heskey-----------
maybe Carson for the future, and also shorey has played well in his games he has played in , so good choice
-------Green?------- Richards Ferdinand Terry Cole SWP Gerrard Hargreaves Cole Crouch Owen subs Rooney, Beckham, Lampard, Lennon, Barry, Woodgate, Robinson
to hell with this rigid 4-4-2 rubbish. Lets atleast aspire to play the 4-4-2 Manchester United style (great attacking prem style). Which is .. They play with a midfield base for distribution and protection, mainly passing it to the attackers who roam all over the place causing havoc.
gerrard in the hole? Stevie "Riquelme" Gerrard LMAO. Barry in the midfield general/maestro role? AAARGGJJ!!! Shorey? what the ******** .. sicknote King. explain how they can build a partnership When King is always injured. Heskey.. well whats the point of having any midfield is the game plane the wimbledon stlyle longball to the big brute. Which little owen looking for flick offs.... That team would get absolutely decimated against top class international teams.
ManYoo's system has been exposed as flawed year after year in the Champions League. Winning a World Cup is far closer to winning the Champions League than the Premiership.
This is the most important thing. If we actually look back at the last few tournaments the biggest problem for us hasn't been the starting XI, it's been what happens when a key player is not fully fit or has to go off. Losing Owen and having to play a less than 100% Rooney upfront on his own in 2006, Rooney going off injured in 2004, an unfit Becks and no attacking alternatives to bring on in 2002. It will be a much better situation when there are players who can do more than just make up the numbers in the squad, which has been the situation far too often in the past.
Worked for Greece. I'd keep the same team as played last week, but with Rooney in for Heskey. Against the top teams I'd swap Barry for Hargreaves. Rio may make mistakes, but he's usually our best defender in tournaments.
Yeah good point... Statements such as the Wimbledon comparison tend to weed out non-creditable posters...
Wimbledon - Areial bombardent to the box to the big forward providing flick-ones. Not quite as bad as that but on the same path. It is just I prefer to play one touch passing at pace, like Arsenal and Barcelona. Although do we have the talent in the english player pool to achieve this. I hope so.
The czechs and italians both have tall target men. Koller and Toni. Heskey can do what koller does for the czechs. Setup the attacks ,plain and simple. Wimbledon played virtually an 8-1-1 formation. Nothing like what was seen in the last 2 games. I saw wimbledon play many times. Laughable comparison.
The funny thing about the Wimledon comparison is Emile Heskey is probably the most mild mannered player in international football. He would be a much better player if he did have a bit of 'Wimbledon' in him.
Here's something a little different: ---------James/Green---------- ----Richards---Rio---Terry------ SWP-----Hargreaves-----A. Cole ------Gerrard------Lampard----- ------------Rooney------------- -------------Owen-------------- You could bring in Barry for A. Cole if you wanted some more help attacking. Or, If you wanted more defensive help, you could put Richards at right wingback and bring in another centerback (Carragher, Woodgate, etc.) instead of SWP. Also, you could put J. Cole in Lampard's spot until he comes back, or maybe keep him there even when Lampard comes back. To me, Barry seems to be England's second best option (if not number one) at left fullback/wingback, and I think SWP can also be effective at right wingback, especially with three centerbacks behind him. I know some of you are going to say they already tried 3-5-2 in Croatia, but to be honest that was really a 5-3-2. I think this formation could work well.
You're wrong. It was 3-5-2 formation they used in the Croatia game, and it was a complete and utter disaster...
In general I agree but, to be fair, we only lost by one good goal and one Robbo catastrophe. It's gotta be said that if we follow THAT criteria, (i.e. 'well, we tried that once or twice and it didn't work'), we'd have to drop the 4-4-2 stuff we've been trying since the year dot coz that ain't working either. Let's be honest, that's failed a lot more times than a 3-5-2. The thing is most international sides play a system that has 5 in midfield in one way or another. It' seems to be only US that keep persevering with the 4-4-2 come hell or high water. It always used to be said that the players are used to playing that way for their clubs but that's not really the case any more. My lot, Chelsea,played 4-3-3, (or 4-5-1 when defending), for the first couple of years under Mourinho and it was very difficult to break down. Since we've gone to 4-4-2, (well, sort of), our forms dropped off markedly. Actually, most teams in the prem don't play 4-4-2 in the traditional sense. Well... maybe that's arguable, but what ISN'T arguable is that the 4-4-2 stuff has seen us play poorly for a while now under both Sven and McSven. Might be worth trying a change. Mind you, should have really tried it in a friendly first but you can't have everything, can yer.