Is McClaren hanging by a thread?

mike65

From The Telegraphs Henry Winter

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2007/03/27/sfnfro27.xml

Steve McClaren will be summoned to the Football Association to explain England's wretched form when he returns home after tomorrow's Euro 2008 qualifier against Andorra. Senior FA officials are deeply concerned about McClaren, with one remarking "we need a leader, not a coach'', although they stress that his position is not under immediate threat.

Unless England slip up against the part-timers from the Pyrenees, when McClaren's position would of course be untenable, he will be given time to sort out the mess that sees England lying third in a qualifying group they were expected to dominate.

"We are not thinking of a change - not at all,'' insisted a senior Soho Square insider. "Let's not start talking silly talk. We've still got the European Championship to play for. As we said about Kevin Keegan, until the last ball has been kicked, we're not going to do anything.''

That comment may not fill England's supporters with great hope, yet the very fact that McClaren will be called to account over Saturday's disappointing stalemate in Israel is reassuring. McClaren himself yesterday described England's performance in Tel Aviv as "good'', adding: "There's nothing radical that needs doing, apart from sticking the ball in the back of the net, and that's not radical.''

McClaren appears to be stuck in the same world of dellusion as Staunton, unlike Stan he's lucky in that Andorra should be beatable although if they don't hammer them and play well while doing so the pressure won't ease a jot.

There does seem to be a genuine head of steam building up against him though, from all non-FA quaters (including I suspect his own players, whatever Terry tells us).

Who'll be gone first?

Mike.

PiE

http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=457124&CPID=3&clid=114&lid=2&title=FA+denies+McClaren+'summons'

The Football Association has moved to deny reports that its International Committee will be seeking an official explanation from Steve McClaren as a result of England's poor form.

...

It is very disappointing to see reports today that we have or will 'summon' Steve McClaren to explain himself to the International Committee when we return to England," read a statement on the FA website.

"At a time when we are giving our full support to Steve and the England team ahead of tomorrow night's game with Andorra, these stories are very unhelpful.

"As the senior members of the committee, we can confirm that Steve, as normal, will attend the next international committee meeting as he and every England manager always has.

Staunton still to go first.

~Rebel~

Especially with teh revelation it'll only cost 2.5mill to buy him out of his contract i could well see him on his way pretty soon. he hasn't given other options a realistic try imo.

For tomorrow i'd love to see;

---

Robinson

---Richards---Terry---Rio---Cole

Lennon--Gerrard--Hargreaves--Barry

---

Rooney

---

Johnson

Just a straightforward 4-4-2 with all the players in natural positions - just for once! Andorra is practically a friendly anyway so why not! We'd see if maybe England are a bit more balanced with lampard out of the team. Give lampard 30mins at the end on for gerrard (assuming the games in the bag) and hopefully being dropped will be incentive enough to up his game. Would like to see Johnson get 90mins, if Rooney doesnt put in a decent performance he should be the one to come off, even if he is a bigger name.

eirebhoy

I'd swap Hargreaves for Carrick. What Ireland lacked in San Marino was a playmaker that'd spread the passes which is something Carrick offers.

Pighead

Well Boylesports can't split them!
http://www.boylesports.com/betting/?gi=6

YeatsCounty

Compared to Stan, I'd kill for a McClaren.

I feel wretched just thinking that.

leninbenjamin

I actually think there are shades of Kerr about McClaren (if that makes sense), they never look like losing, but they never look like winning either. They lack that spark that was missing from Kerr's reign.

I wonder if the sponsors have a say in any of the team selection, its common knowledge for the past three years that Gerrard and Lampard can't in the same team, with Lampard in particular being the worse offender. But yet both continue to play... perhaps it's because they are the more prominent members in the squad since Beckham left, and the FA stand to make a bit more from sponorship when they play together? it's the only reason i can see that they have persisted playing them both for so long...

PHB

I'd feel so much worse if I was an English supporter. Best we can ever hope for is a quarter final WC/Euros, maybe a semi.
Best they can hope for is to win any tournie. They have the players, but they just can't get a manger.

Englands problems are very simple really.
Gerrard and Lampard can't play in anything but a 3 man midfield.
Rooney can't play in anything but a 2 man strike force.

Rooney can't be on the same pitch as Gerrard or Lampard if you ask me.

If you were gona choose, I'd pick,

---

Robinson

---

--Neville---Rio

---

Carragher

---

Cole

---

--Lennon---Hargreaves-Carrick

---

Downing(Cole when fit)

---

---

Rooney

---

---

Johnson

---

But that will never ever happen.

el rabitos

PHB wrote:

If you were gona choose, I'd pick,

---

Robinson

---

--Neville---Rio

---

Carragher

---

Cole

---

--Lennon---Hargreaves-Carrick

---

Downing(Cole when fit)

---

---

Rooney

---

---

Johnson

---

But that will never ever happen.

sure stick van der sar in goal aswell

gucci

considering he had not alot of club full time management (4 or 5 years of medocrity with middlesborough, couple of years making cups of tea for sir alex) its no wonder he's under pressure. his appoinment reeks of the same ideals as appointing stan, as in hes not gonna cause the FA any problems or rock the boat too much. and just as the irish team one has to question the commitment of the players on occasions. considering the FA are still paying of erikksons contract id say hes safe enough.

i wouldnt agree that england are potential world cup winners.

Mitch Connor

el rabitos wrote:

sure stick van der sar in goal aswell

lol - was thinking the same myself.

The best england fans can hope for is that either lampard or gerrard are dropped. Dunno which i would pick. I do believe Gerrard is the better allround player, but he tries to prove it too often, by hitting 60yarders towards the corner flag, which doesn't really help anyone. Lampard plays the ball more simply, but, imo, is less likely to create an oppertunity for someone else as within 30yards he will shoot more often then play an attempt at a defence splitting pass.

I'd prob plump for dropping Gerrard, simply as a punishment for poor discipline - if you are asked to play on the right stevie...PLAY THERE. the amount of time he spent in a traditional CM position against Isreal was a joke, england needed width, not more people in central midfield.

Carrick would keep it simple like Lampard, but would also see and attempt the defence splitter - but he is just not dynamic enough, you need a dynamic player in the middle, and Carrick will never be that. Sure, he can play the ball perfectly over the top, or thread a wonderfull pass along the ground, bvut he will never dominate a game, taking it by the scruff, it just isn't him.

the england team, when everyone is fit, should be the following (imo):

..................Robinson

Neville...Ferdinand...Terry...Cole

Lennon...Hargreaves..Lampard..Cole

.............Owen...Rooney.

The problems for england, as i see it, come from Joe Cole being injured, having to play both gerrard and lampard at the same time, no one being good enough to sub in for Owen, and Rooney not 'getting it' at international level (much like Europe...)

LFC5Times

Carrick is the most overrated player ever , why else is Feguson depserate to sign Hargreaves.

I was at the Lppol v Manc game and Carrick was the worst player on the pitch - the game passed him by.

He out in little or no tackles,the only tackle he did was a foul on Riise which he got booked for i think.

He is such a lame player and even Ferguson knows that.

Playing Hargreaves and Carrick in the middle - even Staunton wouldnt do that. A blind man wouldnt even do that.

Why would you play two holding midfielders against Andorra ? Carrick couldnt score in a brothel.

Carrick should never play for Enlgand again.

I would have Parker and Hargreaves well before Carrick as a holding midfielder.

Mitch Connor

LFC5Times wrote:

Carrick is the most overrated player ever , why else is Feguson depserate to sign Hargreaves.

I was at the Lppol v Manc game and Carrick was the worst player on the pitch - the game passed him by.

He out in little or no tackles,the only tackle he did was a foul on Riise which he got booked for i think.

He is such a lame player and even Ferguson knows that.

Playing Hargreaves and Carrick in the middle - even Staunton wouldnt do that. A blind man wouldnt even do that.

Why would you play two holding midfielders against Andorra ? Carrick couldnt score in a brothel.

Carrick should never play for Enlgand again.

I would have Parker and Hargreaves well before Carrick as a holding midfielder.

Because he wants two midfielders that compliment each other when scholes retires, so is lining up a hargreaves/carrick partnership. Carrick is under-rated, (not by his price, but by fans and the media)

Anyway, its an argument for another thread, not here.

astrofool

On this season and last season's form, Stevie G should be dropped and let Lampard prove he can play in a balanced team. At the worst, they can swap them at the later stages of the match.

LuckyLloyd

McClaren will probably not last beyond July 2008. It was a laughable idea from day one in any case.

PROBLEM: Current management and coaching staff has failed to bring out the best from a talented group of players when it counts.

SMALL PRINT: Not allowed to hire a non - English Manager

SOLUTION: Remove current manager and replace with his number two while retaining majority of coaching staff. Should work wonders depite assistant manager's unproven record as a number one. At least he is English.

PHB

Lampard and Gerrard play the same role, part of a three man midfield, the most attacking part. THat is their best role.
In a 2 man midfield, both players have serious faults.
Lampard just doesn't defend whatsoever, but is very good in attacking player. This will leave the England midfield very weak against top clubs.
Gerrard just doesn't keep the play going. Every ball is a hollywood ball. If he plays, while the defense is given good cover, the attack really suffers, except when he scores a 30 yard goal every fifth game.
Neither can be played together, and neither can play in a 2 man midfield.

Therefore, they have to play in a 3 man midfield. If that's the case, you have to drop either Gerrard or Lampard. Personally I'd pick Lampard.
But to do that, you have to drop Rooney, because Rooney is **** at the front of a 4-3-3.

So you have a choice in reality between Rooney or Lampard/Gerrard, a choice between a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-3,
and since the other part of a 4-3-3 is blistering pace on the wings, which they don't have, and the fact that Rooney has actually performed for England in the past, while Lampard and Gerrard havn't, I'm going with a 4-4-2.

The central pairing of that has to be Carrick + Hargreaves
They are the two best central midfielders in the country after Gerrard and Lampard, but they both play perfectly well in a 4-4-2.

herbieflowers

Carrick (Man U) and Hargreaves (future Man U) eh? No bias there PHB?!

Anam

Carrick and Hargreaves would be a terrible pairing imo,how many goals do either of them score?Not enough creativity there.I just don't think Carrick is good enough for england yet,tbh.

I would personally go for Hargreaves with either Lampard or Gerrard given license to attack.Doesnt matter too much which one it is.

PHB

The bias I have is in choosing Rooney over Lampard, when you could just as easily argue it should be Rooney who should be dropped.

If you did that you'd need a midfield of

----Hargreaves---Carrick

---

---

Lampard

---

Lennon

---

Cole--

---

Owen

---

OR

Lennon--Carrick---Hargreaves--Cole

---

Rooney

---

---

Owen

---

Which would you pick?

Then you have the normal formations

Those are your options, so pick?

Option 1:

----Hargreaves---Carrick

---

---

Lampard

---

Lennon

---

Cole--

---

Owen

---

Option 2:

Lennon--Carrick---Hargreaves--Cole

---

Rooney

---

---

Owen

---

Option 3:

Lennon-Hargreaves-Gerrard-Cole

---

Rooney--Owen

---

Option 4:

Lennon-Hargreaves-Lampard-Cole

---

Rooney--Owen

---

Option 5:

-Lennon--Lampard--Gerrard-Cole

---

Rooney--Owen

---

In order of preferance, my choices would be,
Option 2
Option 1
Option 4
Option 3
Option 5

It's about the team, not the best players. There no doubt Lampard and Gerrard are better players than both Carrick and Hargreaves, but both have serious traits that their club accomodates their formation to.

Nalz

definitely this one PHB for me

-Lennon---Hargreaves-Gerrard---Cole-

---

Rooney--Owen

---

Mitch Connor

PHB wrote:

Lampard and Gerrard play the same role, part of a three man midfield, the most attacking part. THat is their best role.
In a 2 man midfield, both players have serious faults.
Lampard just doesn't defend whatsoever, but is very good in attacking player. This will leave the England midfield very weak against top clubs.
Gerrard just doesn't keep the play going. Every ball is a hollywood ball. If he plays, while the defense is given good cover, the attack really suffers, except when he scores a 30 yard goal every fifth game.
Neither can be played together, and neither can play in a 2 man midfield.

Agree about the defensive aspect, but i don't think gerrard is that much of a hazzard to the attack though - just at the moment england aren't playing to gerrards strengths. nobody is really attempting to get in behind the opposition, so there is no one for gerrard to chip a ball through too - gerrards delivery of crosses is up there with the best, and his lofted through balls can be excellent too. the players either aren't looking for them or are too small to get on the end of a cross.

Therefore, they have to play in a 3 man midfield. If that's the case, you have to drop either Gerrard or Lampard. Personally I'd pick Lampard.
But to do that, you have to drop Rooney, because Rooney is **** at the front of a 4-3-3.

at the moment, rooney is crap everywhere, but there isn't anyone to bring in for him

So you have a choice in reality between Rooney or Lampard/Gerrard, a choice between a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-3,
and since the other part of a 4-3-3 is blistering pace on the wings, which they don't have, and the fact that Rooney has actually performed for England in the past, while Lampard and Gerrard havn't, I'm going with a 4-4-2.

The central pairing of that has to be Carrick + Hargreaves
They are the two best central midfielders in the country after Gerrard and Lampard, but they both play perfectly well in a 4-4-2.

Scholes is better then the lot of them

While hargreaves is a certainty, i don't think Carrick is the right choice. I think the pair would work at United because they'd have the wingers and full backs offering width and stretching the game out, and Ronaldo to occupy 3 players at once, it wouldn't work for england. the wingers come infield too much so everything gets congested and there is no space to play in to. Also, neither are dynamic in an attacking sense. Carrick can pick a ball out as well as anyone, but if the striker doesn't make the run into space first, there is nothing to actually do - and given england crowd up everything, there is no space to run in to.

Lampard or Gerrard need to play that CM role, but they need proper wingers who will not come inside and allow the opposition to get narrow and tight. Unfortunately, england don't have a left winger of the requitred ability (both Joe Cole and Lennon will come inside more often the not, or at least cut back to their right foot so the opposition have time to settle) If england had a player that could go down the left side at pace, and cross with their left foot, and had a right winger that would offer width (which gerrard never offers when out there) the midfield would improve considerably, imo.

mike65

Tonights formation/line-up not actually confirmed but it looks likely.

---

Robinson
Richards-Ferdinand-Terry-Cole
Lennon--Gerrard--Lampard-Downing

---

Rooney-Johnson (I think)

Hargreaves appears to have been dropped as Andorra ar'nt exactly a goalscoring threat.

Better, but I'd start DeFoe ahead of "Andrew"

Mike.

PHB

Lampard is injured, so

It is going to be

Lennon-Hargreaves-Gerrard-Downing

---

Rooney--Defoe

---

I can see Lampard being dropped as a blessing for England. I can see Hargreaves and Gerrard putting in a top performance to win this game, as I think Gerrards weakness of showboating balls won't matter against Andorra, since they are ****.
Could see them giving Andorra a thrashing tonight.

Could get interesting, because if they do perform, can't see the press letting Lampard back into the team

LostinBlanch

It was Rooney wot did it

http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_2023243,00.html

Frank Lampard has been ruled out of England's Euro 2008 qualifier against Andorra.

The Chelsea midfielder was expected to play despite suffering a cracked bone in his wrist in training on Monday.

However, it has now been discovered the injury is far worse than was first thought, leaving Lampard with no chance of facing the part-timers in Barcelona.

At this stage it is not known exactly how long Lampard will be out.

Although the FA have not confirmed his absence from Wednesday's game it has been established from an impeccable source that he has a fracture low down on his arm and has also ruptured all the ligaments in his wrist.

It is believed the damage was done after the 29-year-old got in the way of a Wayne Rooney shot.

How ironic it would be if that incident led to Lampard missing key games in the title run-in.

The former West Ham player is due to play at Watford on Saturday and Chelsea will be keen to discover whether he will be cleared to play at Vicarage Road with a much heavier cast than he was wearing in training yesterday.

It puts McClaren in a strange situation given that there had been widespread calls for Lampard to be axed for tonight's qualifier following his poor performance in Israel on Saturday.

However, it had been expected McClaren would partner Lampard with Steven Gerrard and Owen Hargreaves would be the man to step down, McClaren having presumably decided that Hargreaves' holding midfield skills were not required against a team that conceded 19 goals in four games so far.

McClaren must now choose between the Bayern Munich man and Manchester United's Michael Carrick, whose greater passing skills could just give him the edge.

The FA declined to give an update on Lampard's fitness although they did confirm the player would travel home with the remainder of McClaren's squad after the game.

"We will know the team 75 minutes before kick-off," said a spokesman.

leninbenjamin

I would like to see

---

Carrick

---

Hargeaves

---

---

Gerrard

---

Lennon

---

Rooney--

---

Johnson

---

with rooney and gerrard given license to swap. Even though out on the left isn't Rooney's best position, he's still a good player there regardless, and i would put him ahead of Downing. I think Carrick should be included because he has a great passing ability, and plays great through balls that Rooney, Downing or Johnson could latch onto. Lamps and Gerrard tend to try the spectacular where Carrick would pass. I think Gerrard ahead of Lamps as i feel he isn't as narrowly defined as Lamps, Lamps just has one role at Chelsea any time we see him, and it either works or it doesn't. Gerrard has more of an ability to mix things up a i feel.

GuanYin

I'm beginning to wonder if the England players arne't trying to get rid of McClaren. 0-0 against Andorra after 45 minutes.....

mike65

That theory goes out the window! Gerrard scores.

Mike.

Vokes

Blatant dive there earlier from Gerrard - he should get crucified in the press for that but...

And that first goal celebration was just plain embarrassing.

county

not fit to wear the shirt:mad: enough said

just scored the third,still a load of sh1te though

mike65

Well done to Nugent. He gets his paragraph in the footie history books.

Mike.

county

mike65 wrote:

Well done to Nugent. He gets his paragraph in the footie history books.

Mike.

enlighten me mike

mike65

Senior debut and scores goal . Thats worth a para and given the way football goes, who knows it might be his only senior goal. In which case a couple of lines is all he'll get.

Mike.

Mitch Connor

SofaKing wrote:

Blatant dive there earlier from Gerrard - he should get crucified in the press for that but...

And that first goal celebration was just plain embarrassing.

don't forget his 'tackle' on that fella on the ground... shocking.

But, he did take his two goals well.

cson

With the group of players England have at their disposal..... They really should be doing a lot better....like winning something.

gucci

cson wrote:

With the group of players England have at their disposal..... They really should be doing a lot better....like winning something.

i don't know, they have consistently "underperformed" for years upon years of having potential "world cup winning teams", conveniently blaming luck and poor management. the players just aren't good enough, sharp enough technically and tough enough to win a world cup.
And as for the crowd that followed them to Barcelona last night....why would you bother pushing yourself for them shower?? the abuse they directed to the squad at halftime was appalling. i can understand they're frustrations but that was disgraceful.

PHB

Are England really that good though?

They are quite weak in certain areas.
Up front they have Rooney and Owen who are top class, but nobody else really that good after that. Furthermore Owen hasn't reached his old levels since returning from Real (that said, he's been injured, but he seems to have lost some pace), and Rooney has been **** this year, and is still a kid.

On the wings they are seriously lacking. While Lennon seems like a good prospect, he is just that, a prospect, and nowhere near the finished product yet. On the left they have nobody of real quality.

In midfield they have some great players, Lampard and Gerrard and Hargreaves, but they can't seem to work together.

In goal they have Robinson, who really isn't that great a keeper, when compared to say Buffon Casillas or VDS.

They have a very very very very very good defense, and defensive cover. The fact that Carragher can't get into the back 4 says it all really. They are world class there, but aside from the defense and a world class midfield, they aren't an incredible squad.

Dr Galen

PHB wrote:

Are England really that good though?

They have a very very very very very good defense, and defensive cover. The fact that Carragher can't get into the back 4 says it all really. They are world class there, but aside from the defense and a world class midfield, they aren't an incredible squad.

correct my maths if u want, but isn't that 2 thirds of the team on the field at any given time?