McClaren OUT

gimmick

Ive had enough of his negative tactics, and wasting of Wayne Rooney.

Its a disgrace that we had to watch that rubbish today. England needs a proper manager.

Everyone out.

county

should never have got the job in the first place

cant wait for your Toshack out thread:D

MrJoeSoap

Carrick over Parker? Joke. Got all he deserved today!

Guy:Incognito

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Carrick over Parker? Joke. Got all he deserved today!

Meh, could have been worse. They could have been beaten 5-2.:D

Bounty Hunter

Nothing will be made of Englands poor performance in the grand scheme of things because both Irelands and Wales embarrasements will be Higlighted instead. Ireland vs Wales will make for an interesting **** game though (neither of us can defend).

England will be fine they always struggle to get through an easy group automatically and thats what they will do now.... Go on Scotland!

Healio

Bounty Hunter wrote:

Go on Scotland!

And to an extent, go on Northern Ireland, worse (On Paper) than us and still standing there ground, 4 points from 9.

Pigman II

gimmick wrote:

Ive had enough of his negative tactics, and wasting of Wayne Rooney.

Its a disgrace that we had to watch that rubbish today. England needs a proper manager.

Everyone out.

Nice one. It's my own personal ethos that every manager should be sacked after every unexpected result. FIFA should make it policy.

Maybe Stan will throw his hat in the ring next week?

Aquos76

To be honest, I could not give a toss who is manager of England, or whether the are winning or losing.. We have our own problems to try to overcome.

5-2 is probably the lowest point we have reached in recent times.

homerjay2005

could you imagine how things would be if

1- staunton was somehow give the england job and they lost 5-2 to cyprus

or

2- if our media was as bad as the english.

he would never put his face in public again and be forced out this morning. anybody any good at photoshopping? id love a picture, with staunton and his buddy delaney, having 2 turnip heads on them, ala graham taylor style

kinaldo

I too couldn't give a fück about England. They'll still qualify, Parker or no Parker.

gimmick

He has to go.

3-5-2?

I cannot stand idly by and see the team of my bretherns adopted country fall to pieces.

I suggest a boycott of some sort.

Laguna

homerjay2005 wrote:

could you imagine how things would be if

1- staunton was somehow give the england job and they lost 5-2 to cyprus

or

2- if our media was as bad as the english.

he would never put his face in public again and be forced out this morning. anybody any good at photoshopping? id love a picture, with staunton and his buddy delaney, having 2 turnip heads on them, ala graham taylor style

If our media was as bad as it is in England?, our media is the english media for crying out loud, sticking Irish in front of the Sun doesn't make it an Irish paper, the daily mail, the mirror, all the papers are English with a few pages of GAA added in for the GAA heads over here.

The editors of those papers couldn't really give a toss how Ireland/Wales get on, hence no hounding from the press..

Aquos76

gimmick wrote:

He has to go.

3-5-2?

I cannot stand idly by and see the team of my bretherns adopted country fall to pieces.

I suggest a boycott of some sort.

I cant understand as to why you have such a passion to get so worked up over whether the England team is winning or losing. Personally, I take great satisfaction is seeing them under preform and under achieve.

Long may it continue I say.

_blank_

Aquos76 wrote:

I cant understand as to why you have such a passion to get so worked up over whether the England team is winning or losing. Personally, I take great satisfaction is seeing them under preform and under achieve.

Long may it continue I say.

It's probably something the same as people who get passionate about English club sides.

What is the difference?

Aquos76

seansouth wrote:

It's probably something the same as people who get passionate about English club sides.

What is the difference?

I guess I look at it in a more political way when it comes to country over club, but you would be correct in what you are saying. I get very passionate over Man U but on the other hand could not give a toss about the English national side.

cournioni

The majority of United fans hate the English national side I think you'll find seansouth. Hence the "Heskey/Keegan for England", "You can stick your f***ing England up your arse" and "Argentina" chants.

Just thought I'd point that out to you.

Gillie

gimmick wrote:

He has to go.

3-5-2?

I cannot stand idly by and see the team of my bretherns adopted country fall to pieces.

I suggest a boycott of some sort.

Just curious as to who you think should/could replace him?

_blank_

PORNAPSTER wrote:

The majority of United fans hate the English national side I think you'll find seansouth. Hence the "Heskey/Keegan for England", "You can stick your f***ing England up your arse" and "Argentina" chants.

Just thought I'd point that out to you.

What the hell does that have to do with it?

county

PORNAPSTER wrote:

The majority of United fans hate the English national side I think you'll find seansouth. Hence the "Heskey/Keegan for England", "You can stick your f***ing England up your arse" and "Argentina" chants.

Just thought I'd point that out to you.

what a statment and totally untrue

WhiteWashMan

PORNAPSTER wrote:

The majority of United fans hate the English national side I think you'll find seansouth. Hence the "Heskey/Keegan for England", "You can stick your f***ing England up your arse" and "Argentina" chants.

Just thought I'd point that out to you.

and the voice of the people speaketh.

as for saying that the papers in ireland are all english papers, well, they may be owned by a foreign company, but that doesnt make them not irish.

i mean, does that mean guinness isnt irish, becuase its owned by diageo?
or maybe the irish team isnt irish, becuase half of them arent even irish?

i dont know. there should be something put in the charter that prevents stupid generalisations being floated about the place.

Carcharodon

Wasn't the biggest fan of McClaren before the Englang job but he is a genius compared to Sven in all fairness.
At least he is trying new tactics and playing the players he wants to play.
Its not like Englands 4-4-2 has won them anything in recent years.
At least he had the balls to do it his way, whether it worked or not is another thing.
Also, its not like there is a huge gulf between players on an international level, Englands players are no better or worse than alot of teams, so there is an unrealistic expectation level on these players in my opinion.

Benedict XVI

Aquos76 wrote:

I cant understand as to why you have such a passion to get so worked up over whether the England team is winning or losing. Personally, I take great satisfaction is seeing them under preform and under achieve.

Long may it continue I say.

Did it ever occur to you that the OP may be English.

Laguna wrote:

If our media was as bad as it is in England?, our media is the english media for crying out loud, sticking Irish in front of the Sun doesn't make it an Irish paper, the daily mail, the mirror, all the papers are English with a few pages of GAA added in for the GAA heads over here.

The editors of those papers couldn't really give a toss how Ireland/Wales get on, hence no hounding from the press.

If you want a proper Irish media perspective the you have to go no further than Irish Times, The Irish Independent, The Examiner and possibly The Star, the rest are as stated above British papers (rags even) with an few Irish pages front and back, and I include the Sunday Times in that

Paul Tergat

PORNAPSTER wrote:

The majority of United fans hate the English national side I think you'll find seansouth. Hence the "Heskey/Keegan for England", "You can stick your f***ing England up your arse" and "Argentina" chants.

Just thought I'd point that out to you.

Are you talking about English Man Utd fans, if so you are talking rubbish!

and stick to 4-4-2, will be interesting to see the team when all midfield is back, lampard,
gerrard, lennon, hargreaves, cole, who will play? i'd love to see England play with width (and not Crouch up front!)....Rooney needs to play well for England to play well and he's clearly off the boil at the moment.

Give McClaren time.

MrJoeSoap

Carcharodon wrote:

Wasn't the biggest fan of McClaren before the Englang job but he is a genius compared to Sven in all fairness.
At least he is trying new tactics and playing the players he wants to play.
Its not like Englands 4-4-2 has won them anything in recent years.

Just because he is trying new tactics doesn't mean anything. 3-5-2 with two wing-backs was a woeful formation to choose, I can't see any logic behind it. It always leaves 2 on 1's on the wings, as we saw for the first goal last night.

The three centre backs are left confused as to who they are marking, as we saw last night on MOTD where Terry and Carragher were shown to be marking the one man closely at one stage. Crouch and Rooney were always coming short, never running in behind.

England didn't have a shot on target until the 91st minute, and even then it was a woeful daisy-cutter.

A truly pathetic performance by both players and manager. A home draw with Macedonia and a spineless performance away to Croatia.

Carcharodon

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Just because he is trying new tactics doesn't mean anything. 3-5-2 with two wing-backs was a woeful formation to choose, I can't see any logic behind it. It always leaves 2 on 1's on the wings, as we saw for the first goal last night.

The three centre backs are left confused as to who they are marking, as we saw last night on MOTD where Terry and Carragher were shown to be marking the one man closely at one stage. Crouch and Rooney were always coming short, never running in behind.

England didn't have a shot on target until the 91st minute, and even then it was a woeful daisy-cutter.

A truly pathetic performance by both players and manager. A home draw with Macedonia and a spineless performance away to Croatia.

I also said whether it worked or not is another thing, you failed to quote that.
I am not saying its a good formation but at least he is trying to make things work and not be as rigid as they have always been.
Its not like they set the world alight with previous formations in competitive matches against good teams like Croatia.
You might be under an illusion that they can be a brilliant team, they might well be better than what they have shown but not by much...
Macedonia- very hard working, organised team
Crotia- Their record speaks for itself

MrJoeSoap

Carcharodon wrote:

I also said whether it worked or not is another thing, you failed to quote that.

My point was that there is absolutely no point in playing a system that none of your players are used to playing in regularly in a crucial away qualifier to a strong team. Had England played 4-4-2 last night at least the players would have been used to the system and known their roles.

Trying new things is all well and good in friendlies, but when it doesn't come off (like it didn't last night) you have nobody to blame but the manager. Even the Croatian assistant manager Asanovic didn't think McLaren would be foolish enough to play a 3-5-2.

"The England boss won't try 3-5-2, not against us, he wouldn't dare."

Carcharodon

MrJoeSoap wrote:

My point was that there is absolutely no point in playing a system that none of your players are used to playing in regularly in a crucial away qualifier to a strong team. Had England played 4-4-2 last night at least the players would have been used to the system and known their roles.

Trying new things is all well and good in friendlies, but when it doesn't come off (like it didn't last night) you have nobody to blame but the manager. Even the Croatian assistant manager Asanovic didn't think McLaren would be foolish enough to play a 3-5-2.

"The England boss won't try 3-5-2, not against us, he wouldn't dare."

I understand your point and you are probably right in what you say but you can never truely know whether a formation works unless you use it in a competitive match but your right in saying the players didn't know how to fully use the system and what were their roles
I dont think they would of got a result no matter what formation he played last night, it was a hard task for a team like England and most teams for that matter.

Paul Tergat

Carcharodon wrote:

I understand your point and you are probably right in what you say but you can never truely know whether a formation works unless you use it in a competitive match but your right in saying the players didn't know how to fully use the system and what were their roles
I dont think they would of got a result no matter what formation he played last night, it was a hard task for a team like England and most teams for that matter.

what do you mean? i think a 4-4-2 would have been far more effective, i hate teams that play narrow and have a huge congestion then in midfield.

Playing 3 at the back may be ok for a home game you expect to win (e.g. Andorra) and see how it works first there, but to come off the back of a bad home performance and then a tricky away game where to be honest we could have done with picking up points even just for confidence is pretty stupid.

All learning for McClaren...give him time!!!

Carcharodon

p_larkin99 wrote:

what do you mean? i think a 4-4-2 would have been far more effective, i hate teams that play narrow and have a huge congestion then in midfield.

Playing 3 at the back may be ok for a home game you expect to win (e.g. Andorra) and see how it works first there, but to come off the back of a bad home performance and then a tricky away game where to be honest we could have done with picking up points even just for confidence is pretty stupid.

All learning for McClaren...give him time!!!

Are you ok?? calm down...
I didn't say 4-4-2 would of been less effective, i said he was right
It would of been extremely hard for England to pick up points against a team like Croatia no matter what formation they played, Croatia are a very good team

Paul Tergat

No i typed that wrong, the what do you mean referred to the "team like england"
the 442 bit was just me telling my own point, i just didn't put it on a new line.... i know you agreed with him in the end

i do think England are better than most other teams (or at least the players are) which is why i can't understand what you meant by "team like England".

England should be getting results against teams like Croatia, whether away from home or not. maybe its just english fans expecting too much but i think we have the players to be beating these teams, we just struggle to play as a team.

_blank_

PORNAPSTER wrote:

The majority of United fans hate the English national side

WhiteWashMan wrote:

and the voice of the people speaketh.

:rolleyes:

WhiteWashMan wrote:

i dont know. there should be something put in the charter that prevents stupid generalisations being floated about the place.

Quite.

Dempsey

Keep McLaren, i love listening to Sky Sports/BBC/ITV when England stuff up. They live in a dream world half the time

Carcharodon

I honestly dont rate England as highly as some might do, i dont think that their individual players are better than any other bunch of international players.
They have some world class players, but alot of international teams have players like this, better in my opinion in regards to some players.
Its only natural that people think that these players are better than they actually are with the media and all.
They do have enough quality players to contest better than they have but they lack leadership, tactics and a cutting edge.
Iam not anti English or anything, its just my opinion from a footballing point of view.
I think people underestimate teams like Croatia, they have quality players spread out over Europe and produce some quality team performances

Paul Tergat

Carcharodon wrote:

I honestly dont rate England as highly as some might do, i dont think that their individual players are better than any other bunch of international players.
They have some world class players, but alot of international teams have players like this, better in my opinion in regards to some players.
Its only natural that people think that these players are better than they actually are with the media and all.
They do have enough quality players to contest better than they have but they lack leadership, tactics and a cutting edge.
Iam not anti English or anything, its just my opinion from a footballing point of view.
I think people underestimate teams like Croatia, they have quality players spread out over Europe and produce some quality team performances

I very much agree with your point that there are some nations, like Croatia, who have a very good team but i totally disagree with you saying that England's individual players isn't better than any other bunch. look at it this way, how many players from the Croatian team would get into the England side....the back line is class (4 at the back ), i rate Gerrard as the best midfielder in the world (and IMO the best all round player in the world! hurts to say as a UTD fan but my opinion). i agree some are overrated, Lampard for example (again my opinion) but Rooney is class and i think if Owen can ever get fit again he's worth a good few goals....so to be honest i think our starting 11 is one of the best there is!

sofireland

Didn't Man U get in trouble for having a banner in the stretford end at a match that had "Man Utd > England"

Anyway, i do think there is a lot of unfair expectation on this english team especially since euro 96 .

They have some truly gifted players, namely Rooney, Gerrard, Terry but they sometimes don't play as a team...

Its all the media hype, think the players think they will win everything just cos they are england!

Carcharodon

p_larkin99 wrote:

I very much agree with your point that there are some nations, like Croatia, who have a very good team but i totally disagree with you saying that England's individual players isn't better than any other bunch. look at it this way, how many players from the Croatian team would get into the England side....the back line is class (4 at the back ), i rate Gerrard as the best midfielder in the world (and IMO the best all round player in the world! hurts to say as a UTD fan but my opinion). i agree some are overrated, Lampard for example (again my opinion) but Rooney is class and i think if Owen can ever get fit again he's worth a good few goals....so to be honest i think our starting 11 is one of the best there is!

I am not going to pretend that i know all of Croatias players and say they are as good as Englands but i do think that player for player, there would not be a huge gulf into the quality of players. They were also missing 3 players last night i think.
I think if you compare Englands players with other top nations you could not make the statement as to what players from these teams would get in the England team as the difference between these players is merely only a difference of opinion.
I agree with you on Gerrard, he will work all day for you and is 110% commited to the team, you could play him anywhere bar goals and he would do a job for you. Also agree on Lampard, Rooney can give something extra, will never be a prolific goal scorer, and i think owen can get you goals but is not anything special in my opinion

Paul Tergat

Carcharodon wrote:

I am not going to pretend that i know all of Croatias players and say they are as good as Englands but i do think that player for player, there would not be a huge gulf into the quality of players. They were also missing 3 players last night i think.
I think if you compare Englands players with other top nations you could not make the statement as to what players from these teams would get in the England team as the difference between these players is merely only a difference of opinion.
I agree with you on Gerrard, he will work all day for you and is 110% commited to the team, you could play him anywhere bar goals and he would do a job for you. Also agree on Lampard, Rooney can give something extra, will never be a prolific goal scorer, and i think owen can get you goals but is not anything special in my opinion

Totally 100% agree, there are a few German, Dutch, Italian and French to name 4 that i would gladly take a few players from which would improve the England team...the whole point is that England are not coming up against these teams, we are in a group with teams who have players who ARE inferior to our own!

Sure there is not a huge gulf in quality, or there is no way that they could be a match, but there is a difference in quality nonetheless! An extra 5% in quality is what makes them better players and why the big clubs want them.

Mad Dog

p_larkin99 wrote:

i agree some are overrated, Lampard for example

On his way to this proud milestone, Lampard has been described as fat, only in the side because of his uncle and father, a waste of money, and numerous less complimentary things.

Meanwhile, he has managed the following: FA Premiership winners’ medals 2005 and 2006; League Cup and FA Community Shield winners’ medals, FIFA World Player of the Year runner-up and Ballon D’Or European Player of the Year runner-up, FWA Footballer of the Year, Barclay’s Premiership Player of the Year, named in the FIFPro World Team of the Year 2005; PFA Player of the Year runner-up 2004, 2005 and 2006; Chelsea Golden Boot winner 2005 (19 goals) and 2006 (20 goals), Chelsea Player of the Year 2004 and 2005, FWA Footballer of the Year runner-up 2004, and FA Cup runner-up medal 2002.

He has also set a new record for consecutive Premiership games by any player, 164, beating the record of goalkeeper David James, and at the same time broke John Hollins’ Chelsea League record of 135.

He has won the Intertoto Cup with West Ham, been voted the England team’s Player of the Year by the fans, and he has top scored for England at the European Championships in 2004. But then he blanked in the 2006 World Cup, and the media world has been on his back ever since.

It is ironic that because of his extraordinary goalscoring feats as a midfielder, he has become judged as a goalscorer.

When Chelsea bought him, pre-Roman Abramovich, for £11m, it seemed a lot of money. It’s worth remembering, however, that the day before Arsenal spent £10m on Francis Jeffers.

Frank was bought to replace two people really — and not just any two people. He was bought as a goalscoring midfielder to replace Gustavo Poyet, and as a central midfielder to replace Dennis Wise.

In his first season, 2001/02, he was okay. He ended it well, particularly with his FA Cup Final performance. But he didn’t rip up any carpets in his opening 12 months. He was solid. He was John Bumstead, which is a big compliment. But you wouldn’t pay the equivalent of £11m for John Bumstead — you’d have paid that for Kerry Dixon, David Speedie or Pat Nevin. Match winners!

In his second season, 2002/03, he added crucial goals to his game, like the winner in the opening match at Charlton. He became a match winner. And he added surging runs and long range passing. He started influencing games throughout. He became a player of international quality.

In his third season, 2003/04, he added defence-splitting passes, assists of the highest quality, deadly free-kicks, and his goalscoring took off. He got 15 for Chelsea and five for England. He became world class. For older supporters he actually looked like Alan Hudson with goals.

In his fourth season, 2004/05, his first touch and mobility on the ball improved remarkably. He scored 19 goals. We won the League. He was voted the second best player in the world.

In his fifth season, 2005/06, he scored 20 goals and won the League again. He scored 16 League goals, the most by a midfielder since the Premiership had started. He was ripping up the record books. And yet, perhaps, there was a feeling that his all-round game was not quite as good.

Meanwhile, check his assists. In 2004/05 he got 31. In second equal place were Damien Duff and Eidur Gudjohnsen with 13. In 2005/06 he got 21. In second place was Didier Drogba with 12. True, there was a drop of ten, but that was still a figure higher than even the unique Gianfranco Zola ever accomplished. He was in a different planet in creating goals for others.

This season he has scored four goals, four behind Drogba but still our second top scorer. He has four assists, one more than each of Wayne Bridge, Michael Essien and Arjen Robben. He is top of our assists.

And, with one exception, you can go back to Bobby Charlton for an England attacking midfielder who achieved more than Frank in all aspects of his career. Since then, Colin Bell, Trevor Brooking, Bryan Robson, Paul Gascoigne, and David Platt would all look at his list of achievements above and not be able to better them. Ironically, only his predecessor, Paul Scholes, can match them.

Sounds over-rated to me ok

Paul Tergat

Mad Dog wrote:

Sounds over-rated to me ok

Firstly, you missed out me saying that's my opinion! People seem to do that a lot here and that's why i made sure i put that in, but again it was ignored.

Second, i will never accept that Lampard is a better player than Gerrard, not a chance! This annoys me for England, when Gerrard is moved out of position to accomodate for someone, but then again this shows his class that he is capable of playing in different positions!

If we were to look at attacking midfielders i'd take Kaka anyday over Lampard....i think he's a better player and has more to his game than shoot on sight Frank!

That article you posted seems definitely biased, the neglect for lack of defensive talent for example....the reason he gets so many goals is because he's allowed to do whatever he wants in the chelsea team, he doesn't need to worry about tracking back, marking runners etc as he has players to do that for him.....

Paul Scholes at his best was better than Lampard at his best (present) but he was never voted second best in the world!

Mad Dog

p_larkin99 wrote:

never voted second best in the world!

Exactly !! !!

Paul Tergat

Mad Dog wrote:

Exactly !! !!

So therefore Frank Lampard is a better player than Scholes was at his best? Great argument you put forward there!

And i take it from the fact that you didn't pick any parts of the rest of my post to repsond to you agree with what i said? He is overrated IMO.

smemon

it's the usual story. They'll have one or two bad results in the group, yet still top it due to to the others taking points off each other.

They'll line up about 20 home friendlies before the Euro's against the likes of slovenia and latvia, hammer them all, go in as tournament favourites, coast through the group stages and get knocked out by a decent side in the quarter/semi finals.

i could write the script mclaren will be sacked due to media pressure and some other tube will happily take over the job only to go through the whole thing again.

kinaldo

Laguna wrote:

If our media was as bad as it is in England?, our media is the english media for crying out loud, sticking Irish in front of the Sun doesn't make it an Irish paper, the daily mail, the mirror, all the papers are English with a few pages of GAA added in for the GAA heads over here.

The editors of those papers couldn't really give a toss how Ireland/Wales get on, hence no hounding from the press..

Eh, no! The Irish Mirror today had 8 pages devoted to Ireland's game last night, covered by Irish journalists. McClaren's England were only given a half page report 8 pages into the sports section.

cournioni

county wrote:

what a statment and totally untrue

I didn't say that all United fans didn't support England, I said the majority don't. Are you saying that United fans don't sing anti England songs, because I've heard three of them in the Wigan game today already.

Seansouth, I think this is very relevant to what you've said about people from Ireland supporting English teams yet loving to see England being beaten. How is it any different to people from England supporting an English team and loving to see England being beaten? That is the point I am making.

As for McClaren, the future doesn't look too good for him in his current job. If he loses one more game he will be in big trouble, the media won't take very kindly to it and the fans will get on his back. I can see him resigning after this campeign unless there is a big revival.

Dempsey

smemon wrote:

it's the usual story. They'll have one or two bad results in the group, yet still top it due to to the others taking points off each other.

They'll line up about 20 home friendlies before the Euro's against the likes of slovenia and latvia, hammer them all, go in as tournament favourites, coast through the group stages and get knocked out by a decent side in the quarter/semi finals.

i could write the script mclaren will be sacked due to media pressure and some other tube will happily take over the job only to go through the whole thing again.

It's funny every time it happens

_blank_

Well after last night's ineptitude in tactics his position must surely becoming untenable?

county

county wrote:

should never have got the job in the first place

and i still stand by this quote

eirebhoy

What are England's chances if they lose away to Russia and Israel? 2 very tough games. Still odds on to qualify?

Carcharodon

McClaren was obviously a poor choice of manager from day 1, he never proved at club level to be tacticaly estute or have the required motivational skills. He does not have the courage to drop big names in order to have a more balanced team.
Its just a follow on from Svens era, with nothing really changing.
In McClarens defence, Spain are a world class team and England do not have the right to beat them just because they think they should, any team in the world will find it tough against Spain.
England badly a consistent strike partner for Rooney, Johnson and Bent are probably the best options available, maybe Defoe but I dont think he plays off the defenders shoulder enough

Guy:Incognito

Things arent all bad. Imagine how bad it could get if Staubton was managing them.


Either way, last night was a friendly.

Pepe LeFrits

Everybody dance now! Do, do, do do, do...

McClaren is not a top level manager, but we all knew that when he was appointed. He was appointed because they couldn't get anyone else, or at least agree on anyone else, and that doesn't seem to have changed so what is the point in sacking him now? David Dein nearly got England a top manager, but the rest of the selection panel ****ed it up.

While the results and performances haven't been up to scratch for him so far, I think McClaren deserves some credit for a few of his decisions. Getting rid of Beckham was a good idea, as was bringing in Foster, Woodgate, Barry and Barton. It'll be interesting to see if he sticks with Foster over Robinson for a competitive match. I wonder if, after yet another poor performance, he'll drop Fat Frank - Kevin Nolan is long over due a cap at this stage.