• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Football•Soccer•Fútbol•Fussball Thread 2010/2011 |OT2|

Status
Not open for further replies.

Moobabe

Member
Feorax said:
Based on his performances in this tournament, i would agree.

However, He's been played in an awful position all the way through the tournament, and LFC is an entirely different setup to England, just as SFC was. Writing him off on these performances alone is about the same level seen from the worst of the RAWKites.

Ill judge him on the performances he puts in wearing a red shirt. If he's shit then, hes getting called on it.

He was pretty atrocious in the second half of the season as well for Sunderland - and where should he playing? You think he's good enough to replace Sturridge on the right hand side? Or Albrighton? Cleverly?
 

Feorax

Member
Moobabe said:
He was pretty atrocious in the second half of the season as well for Sunderland - and where should he playing? You think he's good enough to replace Sturridge on the right hand side? Or Albrighton? Cleverly?
Hes playing essentially as a lone defensive midfielder in front of the 4 at the back. The only time he had any infulence in the game was when he broke ranks and went forward.

Central mid is fine, but its pointless playing that position confined to your own half.
 

Moobabe

Member
Feorax said:
Hes playing essentially as a lone defensive midfielder in front of the 4 at the back. The only time he had any infulence in the game was when he broke ranks and went forward.

Central mid is fine, but its pointless playing that position confined to your own half.

When has he been playing there? Mancienne was there for the first 2 games and Muamba is there today.
 
Moobabe said:
When has he been playing there? Mancienne was there for the first 2 games and Muamba is there today.

Mancienne was playing? First I've heard of it. Henderson's been playing so deep it cannot be anything other than team orders. But to be honest I don't care. Gerrard was shit for England for years. You'll all think we've been robbed and gloat about it. And I'll not care and wait to see how he plays for us first.

Meanwhile, England should've had a penalty there in the U17s, what was the ref thinking? He's given a GOAL KICK? WHAT? lol FIFA. Sterling stylin.
 

Moobabe

Member
Dark Machine said:
Mancienne was playing? First I've heard of it. Henderson's been playing so deep it cannot be anything other than team orders. But to be honest I don't care. Gerrard was shit for England for years. You'll all think we've been robbed and gloat about it. And I'll not care and wait to see how he plays for us first.

Meanwhile, England should've had a penalty there in the U17s, what was the ref thinking? He's given a GOAL KICK? WHAT? lol FIFA. Sterling stylin.

I'm not gloating at all. And yes; Mancienne was captain for the first 2 games.

2 - 1 oh well. Poor tactics cost them over the 3 games; Sinclair, Lansbury and Albrighton should have played more - Mancienne, Rose and Henderson shocking throughout.
 
Interested to see how the press reacts to the under-21 team going home.

Picking on specific players is just inimical in the end. The team played poor all around, end of.
 

Feorax

Member
Press will treat it exactly like senior team are treated. If youve listened to talksport at all over the last week or so, you'll know what to expect.
 

PaulLFC

Member
Stuart Pearce is an awful, awful manager. I think too much blame is being levelled at the players, they're going to go out and do what they're told by him and his tactics, if you can call them that, are shocking.
 

Moobabe

Member
WJD said:
I agree with most the blame being placed on Pearce.

That can only go so far though - I agree that he's extremely average - but the players haven't played well at all over the course of the group.
 
Moobabe said:
That can only go so far though - I agree that he's extremely average - but the players haven't played well at all over the course of the group.

You know as a player if something isn't working, you either bring it up at half time, or you try your best on the field to make something work.
 
Wow. Go the U17s.

Just goes to show that all the money we spend on our football academies can at least prepare them for the potential onslaught of teams like Rwanda.
 

Splatt

Member
About England U21's, all the losses and the awful and uninspired play is clearly the managers fault. There is a lot of talent in the squad, but the shit negative tactics where you just hoof the ball forward and hope for a miracle from your attackers, is a tactic belonging in a caveman era. Until that changes, they aren't going past the group stage.
 

Moobabe

Member
Chriswok said:
You know as a player if something isn't working, you either bring it up at half time, or you try your best on the field to make something work.

Exactly - the tactics might limit you as a player but you can still perform or put the effort in. Sturridge and Jones were good examples - Walker played well in the first game but was anonymous after that.
 
LabouredSubterfuge said:
Wow. Go the U17s.

Just goes to show that all the money we spend on our football academies can at least prepare them for the potential onslaught of teams like Rwanda.

Hey don't knock Rwanda mate. Nearly every African player in Europe uses the cash they get paid to set up youth academies back home, 'tis why they're very good at youth levels. Plus I'm sure Kagame put a ton of state money into football to pacify the people there.
 
LabouredSubterfuge said:
Wow. Go the U17s.

Just goes to show that all the money we spend on our football academies can at least prepare them for the potential onslaught of teams like Rwanda.

Watch a bit more of it..

Typical post-loss reaction anyhow.
 

Scum

Junior Member
Chriswok said:
You know as a player if something isn't working, you either bring it up at half time, or you try your best on the field to make something work.
That requires footballing intelligence though... *dives for cover*
 
Scum said:
That requires footballing intelligence though... *dives for cover*

Nothing wrong with what you've said. England has been, and will be for at least another decade, been all about the physical development, with the mental side shoved to one side.

You see it at grassroots, and even some Elite Academy Teams, where the manager/coach stands on the sidelines and barks orders (decisions) for players throughout the game.

PASS THE BALL!
SHOOT!
PASS!
PASS!
PAAS!

Joystick coaching holds back our teams.
 
There is no use having a go at the players. For one they are young and inexperienced. They can improve, will improve and some will be brilliant players.

What this shows is the problem within the system. Firstly, coaching wise, the players are not good enough, you see the young players other nations have and ours are well behind on a skill level. Secondly, our best player at this level is not even there. Wilshere should be playing, he'd make a big difference, but even if he didn't, it sends out the wrong message. He is not too good, too tired or too anything for the team or the level, Juan Mata is there for Spain. Wilshere should have gone. Lastly and most importantly is the management side, Pearce himself seems to have made mistakes, but nvm Pearce, nvm the results...what were England doing at this tournament? What was the aim? English football has no goal, no focal point, the national team has no idenity. Henderson may have had no idea what he was doing, i can live with that, he's young. Whats worrying is Pearce and the FA don't know what they want, we don't have a style, a template. Germany have their counter attack, Spain the possession, Brazil the quick samba pass and move. England as a national team have no style. It's a big problem.
 

WJD

Member
I'm trying to remember how I was coached as a youngster but really can't remember. All I know is that when I was the tallest (early developer) I was put in defence and when I was the fastest I was put on the wing with no thought put into what I was really meant to be doing in those positions.

Maybe I just had shit coaches.
 
WJD said:
I'm trying to remember how I was coached as a youngster but really can't remember. All I know is that when I was the tallest (early developer) I was put in defence and when I was the fastest I was put on the wing with no thought put into what I was really meant to be doing in those positions.

Maybe I just had shit coaches.

We had a similar setup: Largest at the back (I was lightning quick but stocky) and the manager's son upfront.
 
WJD said:
I'm trying to remember how I was coached as a youngster but really can't remember. All I know is that when I was the tallest (early developer) I was put in defence and when I was the fastest I was put on the wing with no thought put into what I was really meant to be doing in those positions.

Maybe I just had shit coaches.

Sounds about right. They've looked at your physical qualities and shoe horned you into a position, rather then taking the time to look at what you're technically good at. Typical English mentality to team building really.

They're trying to move away from that (The FA), but the truth is the guys who are the top of Elite Development at Professional clubs are people who are 40-50+ and are set in their ways now. Its too late for them to change.

Thankfully, you have a host of younger coaches who are looking to change working with the Elite Development Squads (6-8 year olds) and the Elite Teams above them (9-16).
 
WJD said:
I'm trying to remember how I was coached as a youngster but really can't remember. All I know is that when I was the tallest (early developer) I was put in defence and when I was the fastest I was put on the wing with no thought put into what I was really meant to be doing in those positions.

Maybe I just had shit coaches.

I remember a little. The biggest, fattest guy got put up front, and we hoofed it at him. And because I was the least popular I got stuck in goal. There's no shape, or direction, or even any tactical ideas put forward that I can remember. Just go out there and do whatever.

Chriswok, you might well say that 'joystick coaches' hold teams back. I'm not saying you're wrong, in fact I think you're correct. However from my experience, whenever left to ones own devices, most English players just hoof the ball and rush after it.

Chriswok said:
They're trying to move away from that (The FA), but the truth is the guys who are the top of Elite Development at Professional clubs are people who are 40-50+ and are set in their ways now. Its too late for them to change.

Thankfully, you have a host of younger coaches who are looking to change working with the Elite Development Squads (6-8 year olds) and the Elite Teams above them (9-16).

Even at clubs like Liverpool and United and Arsenal? Or are we talking lower down where many of the English young players actually are being brought up.
 
Dark Machine said:
Chriswok, you might well say that 'joystick coaches' hold teams back. I'm not saying you're wrong, in fact I think you're correct. However from my experience, whenever left to ones own devices, most English players just hoof the ball and rush after it.

That's because they're void of decision making, and they resort to to the only thing they can remember - their coach shouting at them to get the ball forward. It takes a brave coach to do his coaching during the week, and to sit and allow his players to play the game at the weekend.

You might get involved throughout the game in small doses, reminders about positioning, or questioning a player's decision with an open question, but you shouldn't be on the touchline for 90minutes playing the game for them.

That's my view, its what I coach by. It seems to work well for me and my players.

Dark Machine said:
Even at clubs like Liverpool and United and Arsenal? Or are we talking lower down where many of the English young players actually are being brought up.

Man U, Arsenal and Chelsea have very good coaches working for them, Man City did too (but a few left). However, certainly once you go down the system, and end up at Grassroots it tends to happen the most.
 
WJD said:
We put our fatty in goal. He was quite good actually.

Our fatty was up front because he was so big you couldn't get the damn ball off him, that and he had a very powerful shot, so he could barrel his way through opponents easily.

Chriswok said:
That's because they're void of decision making, and they resort to to the only thing they can remember - their coach shouting at them to get the ball forward. It takes a brave coach to do his coaching during the week, and to sit and allow his players to play the game at the weekend.

You might get involved throughout the game in small doses, reminders about positioning, or questioning a player's decision with an open question, but you shouldn't be on the touchline for 90minutes playing the game for them.

That's my view, its what I coach by. It seems to work well for me and my players.

I fully agree with your coaching philosophy and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. I'd also give you an e-hug were you not a horrendous Liverpool-basher.
 

Scum

Junior Member
I remember when I was back home in Ghana, staying with my grandparents for a few years. Football for us kids was practically self taught. No one wanted to be in goal. So what we did was simple. We had 3ft wide goals on a small side pitch and played 2-3 touch footie. Everything you need to know about football was right there. ;-)

Seeing kids playing on full side pitches in England at such a young age nowadays just..welll.... :-(
 

WJD

Member
The was also a heavy focus on 'Wembley singles/doubles' when I played at school which obviously leads to emphasis on individuals and poking home a dodgy deflection or something.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom