England best starting XI

Jazzy

we all probably know these particular players better then any in the world and like it or not, the EPL provides the guts of irelands footy following.
With all the crap we read in the british press about the national team, i have never really seen it discussed that much on the board (bearing in mind that 90% of the posts here are normally about players in their national league).

the question i ask is, what do ppl here think is englands best starting XI ?
if you were McClaren, who would you play? (pretend the press dont exist for the moment ) and why would you play them ?

Heres mine

GK - Robinson.
I dont think he is "world class" but he is the best on offer atm for england. i think someone like Carson could take his spot and didnt Calamity James have a wonderful season at Portsmouth ?

RB - Gary Neville.
I may hate him more then Paris Hilton, but he is experienced and v.good in his posistion. he still has 2/3 years left in him i reckon and he has big game experience which is a huge boost as an international defender

LB - Ashley Cole.
Cash Money himself. hes also a complete tool, but hes a very talented tool. Bridge isnt as good as him and imo, thats his only real competition for his place.

CB - John Terry.
The captain and a very good centre back. hes probably the first name on the team sheet.

CB - Rio Ferdinand.
oooohhhh controversial you say.. where is carragher i hear ? tbh, im a pool fan and love jamie, but if you stand outside who u support and look at it logically then yes, he is just better then carragher.. but not by much.

RMF - Aaron Lennon.
Pacy, skillfull and with buckets of potential. seems to step up when he plays in an england shirt aswell. his pace gives him the nod ahead of beckham.

LMF - Joe Cole.
Can you name anyone better who is english who can play this position ? thought not

CMF - Michael Carrick
Often overlooked and very often ppl like to have a pop because of his price tag. the fact is, he is quality. his statistics as a midfielder speak volumes and he is the type of workhorse england need in their midfield to compete with brazil, argentina, france etc. creative, calm and with utd, he'll get all the big game experience he needs.

CMF - Steven Gerrard
He gets the nod over Lamps as i think he would make a better partnership with Carrick. if you were to go with Hargreaves instead of Carrick, then id play Lamps instead of Stevie. I just think Gerrard can function better in this position then Lamps can and with carrick, englands midfield would finally be stable.

CF - Wayne Rooney
Pure class

CF - Mickey Owen
his record speaks for itself. he will get goals and he will get importent goals. simple as


well, thats my first XI. any thoughts ? whats your first XI for engerland ?

mike65

Can't argue too much with that. Cole needs to apply himself more. Gareth Barry might be in with a shout there. I'd pick Hargreaves ahead of Carrick

Mike.

Bounty Hunter

mike65 wrote:

Gareth Barry might be in with a shout there.

as a Villa fan im sure im biased, but i cant remember him having a single bad game in over a year now, and honestly think if he played for Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea or even Spurs (with the exact same form he's shown) McClaren would pick him.

evad_lhorg

while I know beckham isnt the typical winger who has pace and whatever but he is still ,for me, a definite starter.

And Hargreaves ahead of Carrick no problem.

Bounty Hunter

for me:

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

Richards.....Carragher.....Terry.....Cole

Beckham....Gerrard....Hargreaves...Cole

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

Subs: Crouch, Ferdinand, Barry, Lampard, Lennon, Bridge, James

Paul Tergat

Bounty Hunter wrote:

for me:

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

Richards.....Carragher.....Terry.....Cole

Beckham....Gerrard....Hargreaves...Cole

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

Subs: Crouch, Ferdinand, Barry, Lampard, Lennon, Bridge, James

lets try Neville and Rio!

Bounty Hunter

p_larkin99 wrote:

lets try Neville and Rio!

did say for me, and ive nothing against man utd but for me Carragher is essentially the most consistent CB in english football whom if he was not so versatile may have established himself as a first choice centre back for England already. Also i have never really been a big fan of either Neville brother, although would concede that Gary has improved his game in the past few years especially in an attacking sense. However Richards impresses me (and is just as capable going forward). Prehaps Gary would make my bench but considering Carraghers ability to cover RB i chose a LB cover in bridge instead. Just my personal opinion and i expect most people will have Rio and Neville in their starting 11s.

homerjay2005

robinson
neville rio terry cole
hargreaves

lennon lampard cole

gerrard
rooney

Paul Tergat

Bounty Hunter wrote:

did say for me, and ive nothing against man utd but for me Carragher is essentially the most consistent CB in english football whom if he was not so versatile may have established himself as a first choice centre back for England already. Also i have never really been a big fan of either Neville brother, although would concede that Gary has improved his game in the past few years especially in an attacking sense. However Richards impresses me (and is just as capable going forward). Prehaps Gary would make my bench but considering Carraghers ability to cover RB i chose a LB cover in bridge instead. Just my personal opinion and i expect most people will have Rio and Neville in their starting 11s.

i can maybe understand carragher for rio (although i strongly disagree and think Rio is more than worth his starting place) but to think that after seeing Richards for 1 season that he is to replace the best RB in the league is laughable.

of course, this is IMO :rolleyes:

Bounty Hunter

im not a gary neville fan sorry, no need to roll your eyes at me saying its my opinion im not using that as an exuse i just dont agree that he is the best RB in the league, however as i already conceded i expect most other people would consider him to be the best RB so there is no need to quote me and call m suggestion laughable.

the interesting thing with England has always been how their best individual players can never seem to gel into a team which is as good as it seems on paper. They are very similar to Spain in that respect, huge potential which they never seem to fulfill.

~Rebel~

in a 4 4 2 id go with;

Robinson (no real competiton yet, foster and carson need another year or 2, James getting on a bit despite his form)

Neville (shudder, I feel dirty)
Carragher ( i know its nice to have a ball playing cb back there but the objective is not to concede, and hes the man for that job)
Terry
Cole/Bridge (much of a muchness, personally i prefer Bridge but either or really)

Lennon (i really rate beckham but at this stage its worth playing lennon for the future, especially considering the level becks will be playing at next year. in short beckhams better, but lennon in the long term)
Hargreaves
Gerrard
J Cole (though its criminal Barry hasnt had a chance to prove himself)

Owen
Roony

next choice striker has to be Crouch - imo a disgrace he wasnt played ahead of Smith tonight.

flaked in a few spelling fix's but excuse the rest, mildly intoxicated still.

PHB

I don't think Lampard, Gerrard, or Rooney can play in the same team imo. I think you can only play one of them, so whichever you pick, you have to fit your team around.

I guess the most consistant performer at every level would be Lampard, so if he was the player, I'd pick the team of,

---

Robinson

---

--Neville

---

Rio

---

Terry

---

Cole-

---

Hargreaves--Carrick

---

---

Lampard

---

-Beckham

---

Cole--

---

Owen

---

If you picked Gerrard, you'd do the same with Lampard instead of Gerrard.
If you picked Rooney, you'd go with,

---

Robinson

---

--Neville

---

Rio--Terry

---

Cole-
--Beckham--Hargreaves---Carrick

---

Cole-

---

Owen---Rooney

---

If I had to pick the best team, I'd go with the Lampard one. Personally, I think the fact that even Rafa thinks theres problems with playing Gerrard in the center says it all, as I feel if you play him there, it adversely affects the whole team. That said, he gives his all for England, so it might not be the worst thing in the world if everything goes through him, but I'd go with Lampard over him.

county

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

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

Beckham.....hargreaves...Cole

.......... ..Gerrard........

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

mike65

Well someone had to pick Lampard over Gerrard!

Mike.

leninbenjamin

mike65 wrote:

Well someone had to pick Lampard over Gerrard!

Mike.

i'd pick Lamps over Gerrard if it were a three man midfield. that's where you get the best out of lampard. I'd rather have Gerrard in a 2 man though (with a decent defensive player alongside of course).

eirebhoy

PHB wrote:

I guess the most consistant performer at every level would be Lampard

Every level bar the most important one in this case... To think of the abuse Keane and Duff get for having a bad game. Lampard never performs for England. A few goals at Euro 2004 is all he has come up with in his career. Seedorf doesn't get his game for Holland yet on his day is one of their best players. England need a manager with the balls to drop the likes of Lampard.

PHB

I would agree, but I don't think Lampard is the problem, it's the system he is in.
If they are going to stick to a 4-4-2, he has to be dropped, but imo, Gerrard has just as many limiations in a two man midfield. It's one or the other at the front of a three man midfield if they are to play, and if that's the case, I'd prefer Lampard.

Jazzy

i dunno, i think england are all about 4-4-2. i think 4-5-1 would be (as linekar would say) anti-football.

PHB

It doesn't have to be, it can be nice football.
If it is a 4-4-2, I don't think either Gerrard or Lampard should play to be honest. Neither of them are midfielders in a 4-4-2.

Pigman II

           Robinson
 
Neville Ferdinand Terry A.Cole

Beckham Gerrard Lampard J.Cole

          Rooney Owen

They're never going to win anything with it , but then neither are any of the alternatives you can mention.

I think the Brazil match showed that Gerrard can do a good DMC job and that Lamps can be left to fanny about.

qwertplaywert

for me jamie car should be centre back with terry, cole and neveille fullbacks, hargreeves and gerrard in centre mid, lennon and bently on the wings, rooney and owen up front

eirebhoy

PHB wrote:

It doesn't have to be, it can be nice football.
If it is a 4-4-2, I don't think either Gerrard or Lampard should play to be honest. Neither of them are midfielders in a 4-4-2.

I don't see why Gerrard wouldn't be.

SSN were comparing Gerrard and Lampard today, stats from their last 14 games. It said that Lampard has only got 46% of his passes successful (Gerrard was 70 odd).:eek: Surely it can't be right? The only players with stats like that are no nonsense centre halves.

PHB

I don't see why Gerrard wouldn't be.

Well I think the reason why he isn't, is because his general play is lacking somewhat, not through any deficent in skill, but because of how he plays. His desire to always play the killer ball or always take on the 40 yard shot is incredibly bad for the team as a whole. In a 4-4-2, if you have one midfielder who basically wastes the ball every time he gets it, your whole general play is going to be ****. Yes, Gerrard is so good at it, he might get a goal/assist once a match maybe, but in terms of beating big teams, you just can't go down that route, it doesn't work.

I think if you felt Gerrard must play, play him in the positions he can do the least harm to the general play, but still use his greatest traits. That's why Rafa plays him on the right wing. But England already have somebody who is pretty decent on the right wing, also his discipline for playing as a right winger isn't great.

jesus_thats_gre

             Robinson
 
Neville Carragher Terry A.Cole

             Beckham

Lennon     Gerrard      Barry

        Rooney      Crouch

IMO, while Beckham and Joe Cole are good players, they are not good enough wingers. Playing Beckham, Gerard, Lampard and Cole on the same team is far too restrictive and reminds me of Chelsea when they don't play with any out and out wingers.

I have positioned Beckham in what is effectively a holding position as his passing ability is second to none. Depending on the opposition, you could change him for Carrick or Hargreaves.

Gerard is a better option to Lampard as he will offer more to the team overall. Joe Cole is more of an attacking midfielder and comes in 3rd to Gerard and Lampard.

I think Barry is under rated and think he would over something different down the left to Cole. Lennon's pace alone warrants consideration.

Depending on opposition or performances, you could try these:

             Robinson
 
Neville Carragher Terry A.Cole

             Carrick

Lennon     Gerrard      J.Cole

        Rooney      Crouch

But I think it is stupidity to play Beckam and Cole on either wing in the same game as it is far too restrictive. I personally think it is as much of a discussion point as playing Gerard and Lampard in the centre.

As for Crouch or Owen.. I think you have a greater chance of actually getting Crouch on to the pitch. I would not consider Owen to start until he starts showing some sort of consistentcy again.

jesus_thats_gre

PHB wrote:

Well I think the reason why he isn't, is because his general play is lacking somewhat, not through any deficent in skill, but because of how he plays. His desire to always play the killer ball or always take on the 40 yard shot is incredibly bad for the team as a whole. In a 4-4-2, if you have one midfielder who basically wastes the ball every time he gets it, your whole general play is going to be ****. Yes, Gerrard is so good at it, he might get a goal/assist once a match maybe, but in terms of beating big teams, you just can't go down that route, it doesn't work.

I think if you felt Gerrard must play, play him in the positions he can do the least harm to the general play, but still use his greatest traits. That's why Rafa plays him on the right wing. But England already have somebody who is pretty decent on the right wing, also his discipline for playing as a right winger isn't great.

I can sort of appreciate what you are saying but you are talking about the Gerard of 2, 3, or even 4 seasons ago. He has toned down the 50 yard passes considerably in recent seasons. IMO, Gerards box to box talents are not utilised enough by either Liverpool or England.

PHB

IMO, Gerards box to box talents are not utilised enough by either Liverpool or England.

Well in terms of England, no doubt about it, he is used completely incorrectly in every way, it's absurd how they attempt to play him. That said, England tried to play Scholes on the left wing, so that says it all really

I think he would have been the best box-to-box player in the world, but he has unfortunately adjusted his game on the basis that people around him are ****. It's how he was about to drag a team of Traoare etc to winning the CL, cause he made the game completely about him, and when he performed, the team won. He has been moving away from that, and I think that eirebhoys quote as his sig makes sense in terms of Gerrard, but as a current player, he isn't a good midfielder in a 4-4-2. I hope he does go back to fullfilling his potential, as if he does, he could be one of the best players ever, but currently, he's had to adjust him game for his poor team mates, both for Liverpool and for England.

jesus_thats_gre

I disagree. I think be became the box to box player he was because of the inferior quality of his team mates. I think Gerard is an all or nothing player and to pigeon hole him into a specific role gets more nothing out of him.

Chardee MacDennis

PHB wrote:

Well I think the reason why he isn't, is because his general play is lacking somewhat, not through any deficent in skill, but because of how he plays. His desire to always play the killer ball or always take on the 40 yard shot is incredibly bad for the team as a whole. In a 4-4-2, if you have one midfielder who basically wastes the ball every time he gets it, your whole general play is going to be ****.

that why Lampard should not play for England coz he is lazy and just shoots all day, the only reason he does so well for Chelsea is cos he generally has ten world class players around him ti pick up his slack, i.e. passing, tracking back, and picking up players. Gerrard doesnt have that comfort and I would say is the more rounded player between the two.

Personally i dont think England will ever do much again unless they play eleven from one team or have more players abroad - these players hate each other because of what clubs they play for and they value club above country.

i think the chant the United (English) fans sing about Ronaldo sum it up when they say he makes England look sh*te, especially after the controversy over him and Rooney in the WC.

Fratton Fred

McLarens first games in charge showed that England have a lot of trouble getting a decent ball into the box and strangley enoughm there is a lad out in Madrid who is quite good at that:rolleyes:

For me Beckham gets the nod over Lennon purely for his delivery, Nevile for me is still the first choice right back and Rio over Carragher, although I'm not too worried about that position.

I'd go for

........Robinson
Neville...Terry...Ferdinand...Cole/Bridge (not too fussed on that one)
Beckham...Hargreaves...Gerrard...Cole(anyone but McLarens love child Downing)
.........Rooney...Owen

Steve_o

---

Robinson

G.Neville

---

Carragher

---

Terry

---

A.Cole

Beckham

---

Gerrard

---

Lampard

---

Hargreaves

---

Rooney

---

Crouch

I picked this team based on form this season....Carragher was better than Rio this year and Owen hardly played!!!

Subs:
Foster
Ferdinand
Carrick
Owen
J.Cole

jesus_thats_gre

Your team is even worse than what England are using at the mo IMO... You are picking 11 of the best players, not the best team.

Steve_o

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

Your team is even worse than what England are using at the mo IMO... You are picking 11 of the best players, not the best team.

In fairness, one of your teams had Beckham as a defensive midfielder.....Beckham makes a difference to the teams he plays for, because of his ability to run at full backs and put in pin point crosses....he's not gonna be much of an influence behind the midfield pairing.....

Mr Alan

Honestly can't believe some people here are suggesting Gerrard should not playing in the midfield for England if they play 4-4-2.

Who would you recommend instead?
The only reason Mc Claren still has a job is because Gerrard has kept him in it. And PHB, to say with Gerrard in a 4-4-2 formation will just constantly give the ball away after Eirebhoy put up his pass completion % a couple of posts before is hilarious!

Nalz

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

Neville.........Rio..........Terry.....Cole

.....................Carrick.....................

Beckham...........Gerrard...........Cole

.............Rooney............................

...............................Bent.............

Bounty Hunter

biased villa fan says: The way forward for England when Beckham leaves the international scene is to get Joe Cole to switch wings and give Mr consistent Gareth Barry a run on the left.

Mr Alan

someone with no feelings towards Villa, thinks you might be right!

Seaneh

Not the best players but the most balanced england squad (as in the one most likely to proform on a regular basis)

.......................James.....................

Richards.....Carragher.....Terry.....Cole

Dyer.......Gerrard.......Parker........Cole

..............Rooney........Bent..............

Bent is perfect foil for ronney, big dstrong and quick.

Parker is a better player than Hargreves, fact, he is one of the most under rated players in the premier ship.

dyer is faster than beckham and not a shabby passer either, more likely to be effective against good defenses, where as beckham tends to be found out against quality full backs.

I went with James based on his form this year for pompey compared to Robinsons form for suprs, dont really have to say much more there.

Mr Alan

Newcastle fan by any chance?

Seaneh

millersangel wrote:

Newcastle fan by any chance?

No, A.C. Milan Fan.

I've always liked Parker and hated dyer untill very recently.

Mr Alan

Parker is a good player alright, but is he better than Hargreaves, Carrick, Lampard? Should he even be ahead of Barton for a place? I'm not too sure, not convinced at all, Carrick is probably the only one i'd have him in ahead of.

As for Dyer, good option but Beckham, Joe Cole, Lennon and maybe even Pennant should be ahead of him and rightly so at the moment, he might come into a run of form and deserve a call up, but he ain't there yet IMO

Vokes

The balance still isn't right in CM with Parker - still too attacking i reckon - good player though. Hargreaves or Carrick would be best.

Seaneh

Parker is attacking?

What planet do you live on?

PHB

And PHB, to say with Gerrard in a 4-4-2 formation will just constantly give the ball away after Eirebhoy put up his pass completion % a couple of posts before is hilarious!

Lol, 70% is not a good ratio 46% is shocking. However, those stats sound pretty suspect to be honest. What you are looking for in a central midfielder who is meant to be the attacking one is a ratio of about 90%. Ferdinand averages 80% a game in the premiership
That said, Lampard when he does play in a system suited to him can bring his ratio up a lot better, while Gerrard does not.
In Euro 2004, Gerrard averaged 77, while Scholes averaged 86, Lampard averaged 78. Since then, Gerrard has only become more and more of the killer ball style player.
If there is a simple pass on, that will make the team more likely to score, Lampard will make it, Gerrard tends not to. He doesn't trust his teammates. He will nearly always go for the killer ball. This is fine against crap teams, but against good teams, it means that they will dominate the team he plays for.

This is why neither of them work in a 4-4-2, especially not together.

Mr Alan

the reason Ferdinands is around 80% is because most of his passes are about 15 feet to his left or right or back to the goalie and even he couldn't mess that up! (afterthought: Portsmouth OG!:)).

Gerrard is among the top all round midfielders in the world, running at players, tackling, shooting, heading, crossing, there is nothing he can't do. No team could afford to leave him out.

I know what you're saying about him going for the killer pass all the time, but he doesn't go for it all the time, and a lot of the time when he goes for it, he either completes it, or is pretty close. I agree that they might not work together, although - i still think at some point they'll figure it out.

Plus England have no better options in the midfield at the minute to be honest.

Vokes

Seaneh wrote:

Parker is attacking?

Well, what I mean is he's not a pure defensive-mid like Hargreaves is he? - he likes running box-to-box (from what ive seen of him of course ).

So Parker + Gerrard or Lampard may still not offer enough cover for the back-line, imo.

event

---

Robinson

---

---Carragher--Rio--Terry

---

---

A Cole--

---Gerrard--hargreaves--Lampard--

--J Cole

---

---

Crouch---Owen

---

What i mean by that is basically a 3-5-2. Ashley cole will not play as far up, but will get up and down the line. Joe cole will play further up, with gerrard able to cover him if he gets caught out. The 3 man midfield will help lampard and gerrard get forward more, and rooney can drop deep.

it couldnt hurt to try it anyway

PHB

I agree that they might not work together, although - i still think at some point they'll figure it out.

I can't see how. Both have serious faults as a player, and together, those faults are just magnified. Both their respective clubs use two other players to make them work as well as they can in midfield.
Lampard has Makelele and Essien who do their running for him.
Gerrard has Mascherano and Alonso, who do their basic passing for him.

There is nothing Gerrard can't do, but there are some things he doesn't do. A team playing 4-4-2 cannot afford to have a midfielder who gives away the ball that much, they just can't do it. They have to retain possession better, while creating chances. You do this by bringing the rest of the team into the game a lot more than Gerrard does. If you play Gerrard, you have to play a 4-5-1, which imo means dropping Rooney.
This is why Rooney, Gerrard, and Lampard can't play in the same team together, it just doesn't work. You can really only play one, or if you play two, I think you could play Gerrard on the right wing and Rooney up front in a 4-4-2, but that's problematic aswell.

I think after next season, if Carrick and Hargreaves can form a real partnership, we could start to see calls to drop both Gerrard and Lampard for the team. That would be the weirdest thing ever. Drop arguably England's two best players in their position in the world, for the good of the team as a whole

PHB

and rooney can drop deep.

Rooney isn't in your team

Pepe LeFrits

Hargreaves isn't any more defensive than Parker. Both are good defensively for a 4-4-2.

'Pure DMs' in the Makelele, Mascherano, Gilberto mould don't suit the English style 4-4-2 (2 CMs and 2 wingers). You need a much more dynamic pairing, players capable of doing both, if not necessarily equally well. One player in that setup being tasked to just sit in front of the back four leaves too much work for his midfield partner.

Depending on the opposition, I'd usually go for a Hargreaves-Gerrard central midfield but with Carrick-Gerrard against weaker teams that are less likely to threaten. I'd also include Kevin Nolan in the squad.