England Under 21's

[And Its Smith]

Some ridiculous views on here. Portugal had every player in the age range playing who could play. England have a different strategy, deal with it.

England played how they always do - 4-3-3. They never play with two main strikers so Kane was always going to play on his own with two wide men. Obviously the danger playing that system is that Kane gets isolated.

And as for Garbutt being worse than Bryan, that is utter nonsense. Garbutt is ahead of Baines now for me. Baines had a poor last 6 months. Garbutt is England's future left back.

[Super]

Some ridiculous views on here. Portugal had every player in the age range playing who could play. England have a different strategy, deal with it.

England played how they always do - 4-3-3. They never play with two main strikers so Kane was always going to play on his own with two wide men. Obviously the danger playing that system is that Kane gets isolated.

And as for Garbutt being worse than Bryan, that is utter nonsense. Garbutt is ahead of Baines now for me. Baines had a poor last 6 months. Garbutt is England's future left back.

Then you change it when it is obvious it isn't working. Put Ings on earlier. Poor decisions.

[frenchred]

Some ridiculous views on here. Portugal had every player in the age range playing who could play. England have a different strategy, deal with it.

England played how they always do - 4-3-3. They never play with two main strikers so Kane was always going to play on his own with two wide men. Obviously the danger playing that system is that Kane gets isolated.

And as for Garbutt being worse than Bryan, that is utter nonsense. Garbutt is ahead of Baines now for me. Baines had a poor last 6 months. Garbutt is England's future left back.

And therin lies the problem you captured in your first sentence, maybe, just maybe our "strategy" does not, will not never has worked! Instead of chopping and changing managers/players etc, change those at the very top and their outdated "strategy"

[RedRock]

Hodgson, Southgate, Sampson, SoD all key men in the set up with their strings pulled by some faceless blazers headed by Brooking .... Would you seriously want any of these near our Club? We've had two of them and sacked them and the other took us to a level but would we have become established as a top Club?

The whole national set up is rotten to the core, not helped by obscenely paid youngsters who are multi millionaires before they're 20 - thanks to Sky. Look at Barclay (sp) the latest golden boy, who like many others before him, has stagnated and started to go backwards in his career before it's even started.

We may get lucky and one, or more, of our teams get to a semi-final - the law of averages we're overdue one now (even Greece managed a trophy!) - but if you really look at our players as individuals and compare to other teams the skills, temperament, attitude ain't anywhere near world class standards.

Cotts 'I'm a Winner' has got it right. Play high tempo, fluid, attacking football with a strong management style. Loving it at Club level, despair at national level.

I genuinely hope I' m wrong, but since 66 we ain't littered our cabinet at FA Headquaters with trophies have we? Near 50 years of hurt, same FA management strategy and no expectation of winning a trophy.

[Numero Uno]

Hodgson, Southgate, Sampson, SoD all key men in the set up with their strings pulled by some faceless blazers headed by Brooking .... Would you seriously want any of these near our Club? We've had two of them and sacked them and the other took us to a level but would we have become established as a top Club?

The whole national set up is rotten to the core, not helped by obscenely paid youngsters who are multi millionaires before they're 20 - thanks to Sky. Look at Barclay (sp) the latest golden boy, who like many others before him, has stagnated and started to go backwards in his career before it's even started.

We may get lucky and one, or more, of our teams get to a semi-final - the law of averages we're overdue one now (even Greece managed a trophy!) - but if you really look at our players as individuals and compare to other teams the skills, temperament, attitude ain't anywhere near world class standards.

Cotts 'I'm a Winner' has got it right. Play high tempo, fluid, attacking football with a strong management style. Loving it at Club level, despair at national level.

I genuinely hope I' m wrong, but since 66 we ain't littered our cabinet at FA Headquaters with trophies have we? Near 50 years of hurt, same FA management strategy and no expectation of winning a trophy.

If you are talking about the top 8 or so sides in World football then you are spot on in terms of skill and temperament. But, putting ignorant ranting by a few people to one side just for a minute, we were comfortably the better footballing side against Slovenia on Sunday bar a ten minute wobble after their goal. We had plenty of possession, were finding men and should have scored two or three more at least but for a world class save from the Inter Milan keeper and a few chances that should have been, but weren't, buried. That happens at all levels of the game - it's just that with your top, top players (Messi, Ronaldo, Suarez) that we do not possess it happens a lot more rarely.

 

The problem is that the above doesn't suit the "overpaid wasters" argument put forward by "supporters" who I can only deduce just do not understand the game and that is just plain wrong. And I totally agree with the poster, earlier, who is questioning why people who think these players are so bad, lacking in skill, attitude, temperament and everything else cry like little babies when we lose a game. Surely we are punching massively above our weight to even qualify for these tournaments with the god awful "overpaid wasters" you think we possess?!!!

[Portland Bill]

Most of the world? Really? What about the forty plus countries who didn't qualify for the tournament?

The under 20 World Cup is going on at the moment in New Zealand we didn't qualify though!

Portugal did, so it's clear that they have a massive amount of talent coming through which is obviously far better than ours.

They have two squads of young talent playing in major tournaments at the same time.

No doubt a lot of them will be playing in our money league in the future.i wonder how many young English players will be.

[Numero Uno]

The under 20 World Cup is going on at the moment in New Zealand we didn't qualify though!

Portugal did, so it's clear that they have a massive amount of talent coming through which is obviously far better than ours.

They have two squads of young talent playing in major tournaments at the same time.

No doubt a lot of them will be playing in our money league in the future.i wonder how many young English players will be.

To be fair a number of players who could have qualified for the U20's are in the U21's but, as you say, Portugal managed to get to both tournaments and do have more young talent capable of performing at the top level than we do. I don't dispute that the coaching in this country is still sub-standard at Academy level and that parental influence is way too high compared to other countries (that is the biggest single issue that needs to be addressed in my view). The point I am making, though, is that our national side are not anywhere near as bad as people make out - we are a good international side that just cannot get to the HIGHEST level.

 

To get to the highest level we do need to produce more players. Until increasing numbers of younger English lads are playing in the Premiership (they have to be good enough) rather than spending a year at Accrington then a year at Colchester then a couple of Carling Cup games for their Premiership team before even being close to ready then we will not have a big enough pool of players to get past the tournament qualifying level with the odd flirt at quarter and semi finals.

[One Team In Keynsham]

What I don't understand is that there are many comments in this thread stating how poorly set up the England teams are, lack of technique, over-rated, in some cases poor players, yet the expectation is we should have won the game?

The sooner people realise we are a National team in transition the lower the expectation will be, the less pressure from public and media and everyone can stop slating every player after every game, regardless of the result.

Curious to know when this particular transition started. From memory, in my lifetime the national team has replicated City's league status: flitting between mediocre and shit with the odd glimmer of hope here and there.

Once I realised this, and stopped giving a toss about England, all was well.

[RedRock]

If you are talking about the top 8 or so sides in World football then you are spot on in terms of skill and temperament. But, putting ignorant ranting by a few people to one side just for a minute, we were comfortably the better footballing side against Slovenia on Sunday bar a ten minute wobble after their goal. We had plenty of possession, were finding men and should have scored two or three more at least but for a world class save from the Inter Milan keeper and a few chances that should have been, but weren't, buried. That happens at all levels of the game - it's just that with your top, top players (Messi, Ronaldo, Suarez) that we do not possess it happens a lot more rarely.

 

The problem is that the above doesn't suit the "overpaid wasters" argument put forward by "supporters" who I can only deduce just do not understand the game and that is just plain wrong. And I totally agree with the poster, earlier, who is questioning why people who think these players are so bad, lacking in skill, attitude, temperament and everything else cry like little babies when we lose a game. Surely we are punching massively above our weight to even qualify for these tournaments with the god awful "overpaid wasters" you think we possess?!!!

Problem is though some 'supporters' see through the froth. They are passionate about their country, want to be entertained by talented footballers who play attractive, positive football. We don't want or accept second-best. We want winners, who deliver trophies.

What our current national system/footballing strategy, which has existed for about 4 generations of footballers now, delivers is average players who are set up in team's to counter the opposition's 'threat'. Depressingly predictable. As another poster says it's a cultural thing, not helped by the massive wages and superstar adulation given to any young player who rises above mediocracy in the Premiership.

Do you think the England Administrators would ever 'risk' a Cotts type manager for the England job? Never, just like the team, always playing the 'safe' option.

[frenchred]

If you are talking about the top 8 or so sides in World football then you are spot on in terms of skill and temperament. But, putting ignorant ranting by a few people to one side just for a minute, we were comfortably the better footballing side against Slovenia on Sunday bar a ten minute wobble after their goal. We had plenty of possession, were finding men and should have scored two or three more at least but for a world class save from the Inter Milan keeper and a few chances that should have been, but weren't, buried. That happens at all levels of the game - it's just that with your top, top players (Messi, Ronaldo, Suarez) that we do not possess it happens a lot more rarely.

 

The problem is that the above doesn't suit the "overpaid wasters" argument put forward by "supporters" who I can only deduce just do not understand the game and that is just plain wrong. And I totally agree with the poster, earlier, who is questioning why people who think these players are so bad, lacking in skill, attitude, temperament and everything else cry like little babies when we lose a game. Surely we are punching massively above our weight to even qualify for these tournaments with the god awful "overpaid wasters" you think we possess?!!!

Do you work for the FA?

[Cunnyfunt]

Aren't Portugal one of the favourites to win the tournament? Probably why we gave them to much respect. Pritchard must start the next game and throw Ings up top with Kane... Unlikely I know.

[bristolcitysweden]

England on Sunday. You should win 10-0 as we are on 1/10 of your sallary, Good luck.

[bristolcitysweden]

Having money is not an excuse for wasting it

[Cowshed]

What our current national system/footballing strategy, which has existed for about 4 generations of footballers now, delivers is average players

Any strategy England has changes every couple of seasons. The EPPP has only been in place three or four years. The rules governing kids football via the Youth development review was 2012 and on that goes.

England has had no obvious football development long term strategy in place for generations. None at all.

Do you think the England Administrators would ever 'risk' a Cotts type manager for the England job? Never, just like the team, always playing the 'safe' option.

What type of Manager is Mr Cotterill. A Hoddle, Robson, Taylor or Venables?

[RedRock]

They've talked about strategy, new direction, developing the European style since the 70's. Did they not subsequently reduce the size of kiddies pitches, emphasise that 'the results don't matter' and say all coaches have to be FA licensed?

Problem is they are looking at copying a style that was in fashion in the 90's. The rest of the world have moved on. In any event, for the last 30 years our players have clearly demonstrated they neither have the skill-set or aptitude to develop a continental style of play. How many more generations do we try it on?

Develop our own style, based on our own strengths and bomb on. FFS I want us to win something before I expire!

[RedRock]

... and the second question. Cotts is his own man. More at the Clough/Fergie/Shanks end of the management spectrum than Hodgson/Woodgate/SoD. Thank God.

[Cowshed]

They've talked about strategy, new direction, developing the European style since the 70's. Did they not subsequently reduce the size of kiddies pitches, emphasise that 'the results don't matter' and say all coaches have to be FA licensed?

Problem is they are looking at copying a style that was in fashion in the 90's. The rest of the world have moved on. In any event, for the last 30 years our players have clearly demonstrated they neither have the skill-set or aptitude to develop a continental style of play. How many more generations do we try it on?

Develop our own style, based on our own strengths and bomb on. FFS I want us to win something before I expire!

They've talked about strategy, new direction, developing the European style since the 70's. Did they not subsequently reduce the size of kiddies pitches, emphasise that 'the results don't matter' and say all coaches have to be FA licensed?

The answer is no. England is still implemening changes that will still not parellel what should be this nations peers in Europe. In Iceland coaching badges are mandatory for any coach in charge of kids from 3/4 upwards, in England they are not.

There is no enforced national strategy to increase technical abilty. Coaches can gain a level one badge and still encourage poor habits and not have to adhere to any national standard unlike Spain.

Skill-sets and aptitude are developed. Kids do not wake up with them. It is not genetic. Skill comes from pratice. Quality practice, thousands and thousands of touches from thorough football education.

How many more generations do we try it on?

Change takes generations. England has had no coherent strategy for improving technocal abilty in generations. The current four corners ideaolgy outlines technique as one its corners but is not underpinned by the same structure as Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Spain ..

Develop our own style, based on our own strengths and bomb on ...

What strengths?

Working hard is a basic requirement. Europeans do put in "shifts" as well. The Spanish press be they Athletico or Barca. The Germans likewise. Only these nations do it better and ally it to skill allowing their teams e.g. Germany - Dortmund to bomb on with the ball. England struggle to move the ball from A - B with tempo and when teams drop deep [no bombing on with teams flooding midfield] v the better nations Englands players lack the ability to play through them.

All styles, the successful ones are based on technical ability. Wihout this teams have no flexibilty to adeptly change styles.

[RedRock]

Decent response Cowshed... but how much longer do we wait until there is a glimmer of hope of a trophy? Another 50 years?

I think mine, and probably other 'supporters' frustrations are based on three recent performances of national teams at the top of the pyramid, all very similar and, broadly, equally clueless and bereft of any sustained periods of positive, skillful, attractive football. We seem to be going backwards not forwards and with three very similar managers at the helm. With the likes of Brooking and SoD behind them, there appears little chance of progress.

[Roger Red Hat]

Decent response Cowshed... but how much longer do we wait until there is a glimmer of hope of a trophy? Another 50 years?

I think mine, and probably other 'supporters' frustrations are based on three recent performances of national teams at the top of the pyramid, all very similar and, broadly, equally clueless and bereft of any sustained periods of positive, skillful, attractive football. We seem to be going backwards not forwards and with three very similar managers at the helm. With the likes of Brooking and SoD behind them, there appears little chance of progress.

I thought the seniors last week looked very positive, lots of good combinations and if Wazza had taken his chances it would have been 5 or 6-2.

I also thought the first half last night was good, second half they lost their way a bit.

[Portland Bill]

They've talked about strategy, new direction, developing the European style since the 70's. Did they not subsequently reduce the size of kiddies pitches, emphasise that 'the results don't matter' and say all coaches have to be FA licensed?

The answer is no. England is still implemening changes that will still not parellel what should be this nations peers in Europe. In Iceland coaching badges are mandatory for any coach in charge of kids from 3/4 upwards, in England they are not.

There is no enforced national strategy to increase technical abilty. Coaches can gain a level one badge and still encourage poor habits and not have to adhere to any national standard unlike Spain.

Skill-sets and aptitude are developed. Kids do not wake up with them. It is not genetic. Skill comes from pratice. Quality practice, thousands and thousands of touches from thorough football education.

How many more generations do we try it on?

Change takes generations. England has had no coherent strategy for improving technocal abilty in generations. The current four corners ideaolgy outlines technique as one its corners but is not underpinned by the same structure as Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Spain ..

Develop our own style, based on our own strengths and bomb on ...

What strengths?

Working hard is a basic requirement. Europeans do put in "shifts" as well. The Spanish press be they Athletico or Barca. The Germans likewise. Only these nations do it better and ally it to skill allowing their teams e.g. Germany - Dortmund to bomb on with the ball. England struggle to move the ball from A - B with tempo and when teams drop deep [no bombing on with teams flooding midfield] v the better nations Englands players lack the ability to play through them.

All styles, the successful ones are based on technical ability. Wihout this teams have no flexibilty to adeptly change styles.

Excellent post mate.

[joeyb]

When Portugal are using players who have played at full international level, one 27 times I believe, it makes you wonder why we are so loathe to make similar decisions.

 

I can understand the likes of Sterling and Wilshire are considered part of the full set up now, but Ross Barkley should be out there, shouldn't he?

 

Completely agree, I would have taken Barkley, Phil Jones and Oxlade-Chamberlain - none of whom are consistent 1st team starters.

 

I know Stones was out through injury but it would have been good to see him and Phil Jones partner each other as they could potentially be the future 1st team centre back pairing.

 

Barkley would have added power and aggression to the midfield. Although I rate all of Ward-Prowse, Hughes, Pritchard and Carrol, they all seem to be the same playmaker type midfielder - no one was picking up the ball and running at the Portuguese midfield, hence why it looked like William Carvalho had complete control of the game.

 

And Oxlade on his day is a fantastic player, just watch the Arsenal Bayern Munich highlights from last year where he tore them apart. He needs game time and tournament experience which he isn't getting at Arsenal and the England 1st team.

 

Forgot team spirit, we should be developing our best young players not playing fair to those who got the team qualified - the FA need to be more selfish and pushy when it comes to producing the next generation of players, not giving our (no offence to them) second rate youngsters sympathy selections.

 

Will be interesting to see if Joe Bryan is eligible to play for England under 21's at the next World Cup with his birthday being in mid September. I think the rules state that the player must be 21 or under at the date of the first qualifying match (hence why Jones and Wilshere were eligible for this tournament). I couldn't see any reason why he couldn't push Garbutt for a place in that side.

 

Edit: For reference, I did actually think we played quite well, just a bit one dimensional and couldn't deal with that Bernardo Silva guy they had behind the striker. I just disagree with some of the squad selections.

[Cowshed]

Decent response Cowshed... but how much longer do we wait until there is a glimmer of hope of a trophy? Another 50 years?

I think mine, and probably other 'supporters' frustrations are based on three recent performances of national teams at the top of the pyramid, all very similar and, broadly, equally clueless and bereft of any sustained periods of positive, skillful, attractive football. We seem to be going backwards not forwards and with three very similar managers at the helm. With the likes of Brooking and SoD behind them, there appears little chance of progress.

I can't answer the question as many would rip up what the FA do tomorrow, but the radical change implemented by other nations is not possible in England due to the potency of the EPL having academy football etc by the short and curlies.

Progressive ideas from abroad are entering kids football in England via academies, development centres, football schools, and more enlightened junior clubs now looking towards the Coerver [and others] approach to developing technique. The end result can only be more English kids with higher skill levels which hopefully move into teams more able to play the efficient, fast, powerful, high intensity football which England should have pursued in the eighties and onwards instead of getting obssessed with in the mix, long balls, flick on's and corners, with skill being looked upon as fanny football.

The foreign influence in English leagues, their skills / life styles, and experience of more cerebral coaching could also influence the future of development here. There are clubs where it has already e.g. Southampton & Swansea spring to mind.

[Numero Uno]

Do you work for the FA?

I don't work for the FA and I don't read the Sun religously and believe their vitriol word for word. How about you?

 

Some good stuff on here about how England and English players can improve the system but I still believe that parental influence needs to be reduced. Certainly at Academy level there should be far more games where parents are not welcome to observe. You would think that parents would be more understanding when their lad plays at that level of what coaches are trying to do but in my experience a lot of them are even bigger bellends than those who watch at the lower levels.

[Rob k]

I don't work for the FA and I don't read the Sun religously and believe their vitriol word for word. How about you?

Some good stuff on here about how England and English players can improve the system but I still believe that parental influence needs to be reduced. Certainly at Academy level there should be far more games where parents are not welcome to observe. You would think that parents would be more understanding when their lad plays at that level of what coaches are trying to do but in my experience a lot of them are even bigger bellends than those who watch at the lower levels.

I reffed a game in what must have been a under 14s or something like that game when on work experience about 20 odd years ago.

I'm a fairly placid bloke but could easily have had a fight with some of the ******** parents that were up there that day. I like competivness amongst kids but not when it goes over the top and becomes to much pressure.

[The Bard]

Completely agree, I would have taken Barkley, Phil Jones and Oxlade-Chamberlain - none of whom are consistent 1st team starters.

 

I know Stones was out through injury but it would have been good to see him and Phil Jones partner each other as they could potentially be the future 1st team centre back pairing.

 

Barkley would have added power and aggression to the midfield. Although I rate all of Ward-Prowse, Hughes, Pritchard and Carrol, they all seem to be the same playmaker type midfielder - no one was picking up the ball and running at the Portuguese midfield, hence why it looked like William Carvalho had complete control of the game.

 

And Oxlade on his day is a fantastic player, just watch the Arsenal Bayern Munich highlights from last year where he tore them apart. He needs game time and tournament experience which he isn't getting at Arsenal and the England 1st team.

 

Forgot team spirit, we should be developing our best young players not playing fair to those who got the team qualified - the FA need to be more selfish and pushy when it comes to producing the next generation of players, not giving our (no offence to them) second rate youngsters sympathy selections.

 

Will be interesting to see if Joe Bryan is eligible to play for England under 21's at the next World Cup with his birthday being in mid September. I think the rules state that the player must be 21 or under at the date of the first qualifying match (hence why Jones and Wilshere were eligible for this tournament). I couldn't see any reason why he couldn't push Garbutt for a place in that side.

 

Edit: For reference, I did actually think we played quite well, just a bit one dimensional and couldn't deal with that Bernardo Silva guy they had behind the striker. I just disagree with some of the squad selections.

 

Agree with what your saying about putting the likes of Jones and Barkley into the under 21s.  In sterling's case it would probably be a bad idea.  He has been leaned on far too much by Liverpool and needs a break.  

 

I thought the selection of Jones at RB and Hodgson's defence of his decision was the most worrying thing he's done since getting the job.  If Jones was good enough to start in his position for the first team then fair enough, if not then he should have been in his best position in the under 21s and Clyne should have played for the senior team because Clyne is our best right back and needs to gain experience.  

 

The obsession with sticking really young players in the senior team needs to stop.  Chambers started this season as England's right back and ended it the second choice under 21 right back. How many players made their senior debuts before their under 21 debuts?  PLayers who play for the senior team at under 21 should only be exceptions where they are at a high level when young such as Rooney and Sterling, not just because they've played a few decent games in the prem.  People forget that Gazza was almost 23 in Italia 90, not some teenager.  He had under 21 experience and plenty of 1st Division experience and had earned his place in the team.

 

The up side of Kane playing for the under 21s is that both Vardy and Austin have trained for the senior side for 10 days and the management now have a better idea of their possible England futures.    Kane will have tournament experience.  If Hodgson has any sense, he'll not pick him at all in September and October to allow him to have 2 2 week breaks, so that he isn't burnt out come February / March.

[glynriley]

2 changes for today Ward-Prowse out for Hughes, Lindgard out for Pritchard.

[INCRED]

Controlling the game quite well but final third there is no penetration.

Crying out for two up front as Kane is a bit isolated and need to play a lot more forward balls than sideways in my opinion

[Rob k]

See Garbutts end product so far is just as disappointing as the last games!!

[glynriley]

0-0 HT

 

I'd be tempted to play 3-5-2 second half. Take Redmond and Garbutt off, bring Chambers into a back 3, Ings up with Kane, Pritchard and Jenkinson WB's with Chalobah, Hughes and Caroll in the midfield.

[1891 B.C. Sweden]

Come On You Swedes!!!