England have technically gifted midfielders

Probably right but England is we're the money is.....so they stay or others come here

Why on Earth would you want to do that. No offence but it's just stupid.

..................

No, it isn't.

It is now time to move forward. Where do you think the Germans would be if they kept with your old fashioned way of thinking?

I have been saying for the last two years that SAF needs to get rid of Scholes and Giggs, because it is holding back the developement of the younger players.

I have been saying for the last two years that SAF needs to get rid of Scholes and Giggs, because it is holding back the developement of the younger players.
-----------------------



Good one. Cheered me right up that has. Anyway back to work.

Giggs and Scholes weren't holding back players who were good enough or likely to be good enough long term. That's why the omniscient Fergie kept them on.

Same applies to England. We're better off waiting for someone to force Gerrard and Terry out of the side. Earning it will do them more good than simply handing unproven and currently not good enough players the starting spot.

Good one. Cheered me right up that has. Anyway back to work.

....................

I guess it is time for you to get those floors mopped Hoody.

Giggs and Scholes weren't holding back players who were good enough or likely to be good enough long term. That's why the omniscient Fergie kept them on.

..................

I call it sentiment.

....................

We're better off waiting for someone to force Gerrard and Terry out of the side.

.........................

The same backward thinking that has kept us exactly where we are, stagnant.

There comes a point where you have to say that the likes of Gerrard, Barry, Lampard, terry, Rio etc have had their day, came up short, and need to move over.

That day has arrived, whether you like it or not.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The Wonderfully Sweet Little Pea

I've seen these ideas attributed to Hodgson but never read a direct source. Do you know of one?

I have no reason to be sceptical of what you say, just hoping that if I read what he exactly said there may be little qualifications that suggest he is open to a more expansive approach given suitably talented players.
_______________________

I see someone has now mentioned a very recent source they read his lack of interest in possession stats, but I was referring to what I heard and saw him say directly from his own mouth during a press conference when he was questioned about the poor possession stats a week or so ago mid way through the group phase by a journalist.

He got quite defensive and arrogant about it and said something along the lines of he'll focus on possession when he sees any evidence that those stats mean anything, and he was more interested in what they do when they get the ball i.e. how effective their possession was, which is also an argument people used in the 80s to support the long ball game i.e. if it's effective when you have the ball and lump it up to a big man and he knocks it down for someone to score then that's what counts not keeping the ball for an age and not getting a strike on goal. It's archaic thinking from a dinosaur.

I just did a quick search after writing the above and it looks like he got questioned on possession again, but this time post Italy) and that's probably what the other poster is referring to (see link below) re his recent source.

In these comments he now seems to be saying he's only interested in the oppositions final 3rd possession stats when attacking us and their shots on goal, which is interesting at it still shows he's focussed on the defensive side of stopping attacking sides, instead of also considering our possession when attacking them in their defensive 3rd, if he even thinks that is important!

I still disagree with him on this last 3rd only approach anyway, even if that's different from the comment I was referring to, since you can get knackered without the ball for 65% of the game if teams are passing it around even in the middle 3rd. Unless he's suggesting the plan is to have all your men rigidly set up in their defensive 3rd hoping to see out a draw....doh!!

I also note that as expected he has rolled out the excuse about no time to prepare etc etc, and how he's happy with our defending. Is it really any surprise we were able to defend pretty well when you take the supposed 6th best side in the world and line them up with two defensive banks of 4 and simply say try and break us down. That's always tough for the opposition and even relatively weak sides like the ones he usually manages can do that pretty effectively v the big boys. However, the point is it takes away your attacking threat to the extent that you will rarely ever win a series of games against quality sides, and that's what happened with England, and will continue if Roy has his way.

http://www.goal.com/en-india/news/137/england/2012/06/25/3199811/hodgson-i-dont-regard-possession-statistics-as-important?source=breakingnews

OMG he also says 'we tried to play quite positively'. If that's his positive approach im ever more scared

the problem with England is the mindset of the system and fans, if you ask me i would say the english national team is a reflection of the English people's appreciation of the game. How many times havn't i heard united fans complain about carrick's lack of aggression, some even prfering smalling to rafael at right back because he is bigger physically etc. that's what's wrong with the English game.
.................

spot on

Got to be honest and say I've never seen people say they prefer Smalling to Rafael because he is bigger, let alone enough to suggest it's a common example that highlights the things that's wrong with the english game.

I've seen people say Smalling is a better defender, and Rafael a better attacker, but not sure that proves anything of note in this context.

I do however see a lot of english fans raving about Barca's style etc, which suggests to me that they do appreciate their way of playing, and so not sure you can label 'english people' in the corny stereotypical way you are doing i.e. all up an at 'em...

In fact many United fans love United because of their history of attacking flair football rather than the physical power and aggression you are suggesting is all they appreciate.