:::[Official]World Cup South Africa 2010 Thread:::

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by PersiaFly

England is struggling because they're playing cocky soccer. Instead of trying to work the ball into the box, they keep settling for 25 yard shots because they want to make the highlight reel.
Click to expand...
No.

People blamed Beckham in 98, Seaman in 02, Rooney, Ronaldo and 06...now its Robert Green but the same problem persists. THEY CANT SCORE GOALS. Why cant they score goals? BECAUSE THEY LACK TALENT.

This English team is crap. Plain and simple. No creativity, rigidformation = crap team. There is a reason why Premier League teams do sowell in Europe. It has nothing to do with English players andeverything to do with Premiership clubs bringing in the best talent inthe world from other countries.

Did you guys read Beckenbauer's comments the other day? He said English football has regressed and they 'play kick and rush football".

English players are so mechanical and boring to watch.
Click to expand...
Manchester United team who wons the Champions League Final in '08 had 5 English players starting.  (Carrick, Rio, Hargreaves, Rooney, Scholes).....Your boy Walcott is boring to watch? 
 
Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

England are a route one football team. Long ball, flick into the box, shot on goal.

PersiaFly, you arent looking too deep into this. It is not easy to get inside the box in this sport. It takes good technical ability to routinely get the ball inside the box and to create scoring opportunities. England are not taking long shots because they are cocky...they are taking long shots because they do not have the technical ability to break down the staunch Algerian defence, get inside the box and get quality shots on net. This is not a new problem...it's been a problem for them for decades.

You ever wonder why Brazilians are so gifted? Why Germans are such disciplined and smart players? Why Koreans are extremely energetic? Why Italians are such great defenders? It's because that's how they are nurtured. English players are taught from a young age to play a direct and team oriented game. They are usually organized and tactically disciplined but where they fall short is when the circumstances of the game force a player to have an individual moment of brilliance that gets the team the win. Exhibit A is right in front of your TV/computer screen right now.
Click to expand...
I would also ask you to consider different opinions before just hammering the same point over and over again. 
I understand that England lacks creativity, that they are "route one" team, and believe it or not, I realize that it's hard to get into the box in soccer, and in life in general.

But I still think England came out arrogantly in today's game, and I witnessed at least three instances where they settled for long-range shots instead of looking for the extra pass. Like the one Hesky gave to Gerrard in the US game. 

The point was never that England are the most creative team, the point was that they have enough creativity to get past freakin' Algeria if they're playing with the right frame of mind. This is the same Algeria squad that gave up four goals to Egypt in the ACN. 

But to you, it's an inherent problem with the way English players are nurtured. Where was this problem when they beat Croatia 9-2 in two qualifying games? Or when they scored 34 goals total in those qualifying matches? 

Right. 
 
I already explained it to you. Algeria defended in large numbers today, something I doubt England experienced in WCQ. The U.S., Algeria and Slovenia are better defensive teams than any of England's WCQ opponents (except for Ukraine). England racked up goals against the likes of Andorra, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Yes, they did crush Croatia twice but when you look at England's results over the last 12-years, those 2 results against Croatia seem to be anomalies. How often do England score that many goals in a match against good teams? The only other time I can remember was against Germany in 2002 WCQ.

As I said earlier, you need to have players that can single-handedly make the difference and change the outcomes of stale, tight, defensive matches. England have Rooney but they dont have guys who can supply him with the ball.

BTW, does anyone know where Frank Lampard is? British authorities are on the lookout for him.
 
Originally Posted by RoOk

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

the-sun-world-cup-2010.jpg


roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
Click to expand...
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
Click to expand...

laugh.gif

  
 
Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

I already explained it to you. Algeria defended in large numbers today, something I doubt England experienced in WCQ. The U.S., Algeria and Slovenia are better defensive teams than any of England's WCQ opponents (except for Ukraine). England racked up goals against the likes of Andorra, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Yes, they did crush Croatia twice but when you look at England's results over the last 12-years, those 2 results against Croatia seem to be anomalies. How often do England score that many goals in a match against good teams? The only other time I can remember was against Germany in 2002 WCQ.

As I said earlier, you need to have players that can single-handedly make the difference and change the outcomes of stale, tight, defensive matches. England have Rooney but they dont have guys who can supply him with the ball.

BTW, does anyone know where Frank Lampard is? British authorities are on the lookout for him.
Click to expand...

Again, no one said England was on par with Spain and Brazil in terms of creativity, and no one said they have some long track record of scoring goals against good defenses. The point was that this particular England squad's inability to score against Algeria was more a result of their frame of mind and decision-making than an inherent problem with their players. The evidence was that they scored 34 goals in 10 qualifying games, 9 in two games against Croatia. Further evidence is that Algeria gave up 3 goals to Malawi in the ACN this year and 4 to Egypt. But all of a sudden Algeria is some defensive juggernaut that England doesn't have the talent to get through? 




Sorry, but I can't take people seriously when they latch on to an argument and refuse to hear otherwise, and take an arrogant and condescending attitude to top it all off, ("I already explained to you"
laugh.gif
). And I love how you just throw out these statements like they're facts. The US and Algeria are better defensive teams than Croatia? That's a fact chief? Just because you insist over and over that something is true, doesn't make it so. And if you sprinkle some arrogance on top of it, you just look like a stubborn fool. 




EDIT: came across something funny in the prediction thread. 
laugh.gif
 




So the guy who has been explaining to us all how England has, and has always had, an inherent lack of creativity that prevented it from beating Algeria, predicted that they'd go to the semis. 




roll.gif





And guess who predicted they'd bow out in the Round of 16?




That's the ironic part of all of this. You're trying to tell me about England's weaknesses, when I've been talking about those weaknesses all along. The point I was making was that they aren't quite this weak, but of course that went over your head. 
 
Lets just say this.. England is definitely beating themselves right now.  There is a lack of cohesion within the buildup and they are settling with these long ranged efforts.  It's more of a lack of play rather than the opposing team shutting them down.  Although I did mention Algeria was a tough defensive team earlier, I did not expect them to hold anyone let alone ENGLAND to 0 Goals.  I still don't like Heskey being up front at all.  It's been a disappointment thus far for the English and now they play a team that will look to play back and counter any of England's miscues.  I still think England will advance out of this group though.
laugh.gif
 
For those of you that understand Spanish this commercial aired in Argentina before the Cup, it gives me goosebumps everytime.
 
7:30 AM - Holland-Japan (Why does Holland have to have the early games
eyes.gif
)
10 AM - Ghana-Australia
2:30 PM - Denmark-Cameroon

Times US Eastern.

My Predictions :
Holland 3 Japan 1
Ghana 2 Australia 0
Denmark 2 Cameroon 1
 
Originally Posted by CincoSeisDos

Originally Posted by trey ohh five

For those of you that understand Spanish this commercial aired in Argentina before the Cup, it gives me goosebumps everytime.

http://www.youtube.com/v/9CT5mMt1ojg&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0http://www.youtube.com/v/9CT5mMt1ojg&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0
Click to expand...

It's that @@*+ ing song!
laugh.gif
smh.gif
never fails

That commercial is sick as hell though

There's NO advertising like during the world cup

I loved the Quilmes one I saw a week or so ago with Tevez
Click to expand...
can one of you transcribe one time?
 
if anything i think these two games show what has been England's problem for a couple years now..how do you play Gerrard and Lampard together? plain and simply you dont..Steven needs to be slotted just in behind the striker(s), that has always been him at his best..when he plays there for Liverpool where he can play off Torres, hes golden...i really think leaving Adam Johnson off the squad was simply the wrong decision..although hes young and doesnt have much experience, he has an imagination and invention about his game that is being sorrily missed right now..(i think Walcott also should have been preferred to SWP)...sometimes to have a good team, you need to sacrifice talent for balance..leaving a player of Lampard's caliber off the team sheet would be unthinkable to many, but i think its the right decision...you have to pick one or the other, not both, and Gerrard just has more in his game to offer...also i think coaxing Scholes out of retirement would have been incredible for them...every coach since his int'l retirement has tried to bring him back into the fold but he hasnt budged..but i think he said that if Fabio would have come to him earlier, he would have strongly considered it...Scholesy is an absolute terror of a midfielder and would've give them an edge in midfield that is also lacking...in an ideal setup you have Barry and Scholes centrally, Cole on one wing, A.Johnson/Lennon/Walcott on the other, Gerrard playing in a more advanced positioned just behind Rooney..where Rooney plays as the lone wolf up top, a role that he plays oh so well

Johnson-?-Terry-A. Cole
        Barry-Scholes
Lennon?------------J. Cole
------Gerrard-----------
-----------Rooney------
 
Goodness, the game has been for the most part has been Japan attacking and hustling much more for every ball.
 
Damn, that came outta nowhere... Keeper shoulda done better though.  Jabulani-effect maybe?
 
Unfortunate for Japan.Some goalkeepers really need extra coaching.
And why Elia only for the last minutes ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom