Rooney's comments?

Mr Alan

they're not doing it right now, no doubt, but they're a better bet than Scholes.

flahavaj

Mr Alan wrote: »

that's not true Flah, he simply isn't, on his day possibly, but his day is very rare and more often than not he's simply not good enough anymore. most united fans had no problem admitting that for most of the season until he had a couple of decent games toward the end and all of a sudden he's the best around again-nonsense. you may wish to check out Lampards goals and assists stats this year and compare to the ginger fella if you genuinely think Scholes offers more creativity.

Obviously his best days are long gone.

But goals and assists are nothing to do with the things I'm talking about. I'm talking about a midfielder who can put his foot on the ball and control a game. Lampard and Gerrard aren't and never will be that type of footballer. Thats not necessarily a criticism of them, they're just different types of player who are brilliant at other things.

Scholes may do it increasingly infrequently but he is still the best England have available to perform that role. And Capello knows it, hence his last ditch attempt to call him up.

Thats a sad sad indictment of English football and English players, when you think a 34 year old has been is their best hope of someone capable of running a game of ball.

Mr.Nice Guy

Surely the fact he asked Scholes to come back is an indication that he is not happy with what he has got at his disposal? You don't think he went to all that trouble for someone he planned to bench?

If Scholes was available he would be the first midfielder on the team sheet.

You just shouldn't boo your own team on a draw.. It's being bigheaded without the results to back it up.

deisedevil

#15 wrote: »

They're more dynamic, but they don't exactly fit with the team. They're a good 2 yards behind with their reading of the game, from a deep midfield position.

Scholes is exactly what England need right now. Someone who can create some flow to their game, which (for all their wonderful attributes), Gerrard and Lampard are not doing right now.

Exactly what I have been thinking. In their own teams the England midfielders do a great job but it doesn't mean they are going to fit into a team together and make it work. I thought Cappello would be the man to finally sort that out for them but then he just went back to the same old problem that has had other managers scratching their heads.
They need someone to spread the ball around really well and make the right decisions about when to spread it out wide and when to put it through the middle. Right now Gerrard isn't doing that and Lampard certainly isn't either. Sad thing is that possibly the only option he has for that right now is carrick. Christ! :eek:

Mr Alan

if cappello thought scholes was englands best bet in midfield for creativity, controlling a game etc, why not include him in all the qualifying games? Or call him up as soon as Capello got the job? he was called up as cover and because he has big game experience-in the same was Carra was.

Mr Alan

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Surely the fact he asked Scholes to come back is an indication that he is not happy with what he has got at his disposal? You don't think he went to all that trouble for someone he planned to bench?

If Scholes was available he would be the first midfielder on the team sheet.

That makes no sense. Do you think Carragher was called back up to be first choice?

argosy2006

in all fairness rooney had no service all night, you give that man some service and he'd kill you,
can see why he's so pissed off, plus he's only guy on pitch tonight who didn't give ball away,
they would never have qualified playing this badly so something has gone wrong, they could not stop scoring while qualifing , score 34 goals in their 10 qualifing games :eek:

#15

Mr Alan wrote: »

they're not doing it right now, no doubt, but they're a better bet than Scholes.

No they aren't and Englands results are proving that.

Neither of them can play in the pocket that Scholes plays in.

I think you are trying to turn this into 'who's a better player' but that is missing the point.

Scholes is just a better fit for that role. Lampard and Gerrard are top notch players but it's not exactly rocket science to see that they are not able for the 'quarterback' role - a deeper lying player who can link the play together and play the right pass at the right times.

Lampard and Gerrard are second to none at breaking from midfield and finishing attacking moves.

They are being forced into roles that don't play to their strengths - it's hardly surprising that Scholes playing in his regular position would be better than a Lampard/Gerrard playing out of position.

Lando Griffin

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Surely the fact he asked Scholes to come back is an indication that he is not happy with what he has got at his disposal? You don't think he went to all that trouble for someone he planned to bench?

If Scholes was available he would be the first midfielder on the team sheet.

Scholes and Beckham surely. And Rio and Gary Nevill. Heskey has just screwed up a dream return to Anfield.

flahavaj

Mr Alan wrote: »

if cappello thought scholes was englands best bet in midfield for creativity, controlling a game etc, why not include him in all the qualifying games? Or call him up as soon as Capello got the job? he was called up as cover and because he has big game experience-in the same was Carra was.

Who knows. Perhaps he should have.

Are you telling me Gerrard or Lampard have the guile, passing ability and skill on the ball to control a top class game of international football? Because neither performs that role for their clubs and both have failed to do so throughout their international careers.

I'll repeat I'm not knocking Gerrard (or Lampard). They are amongst the best in the world at what they do. But that does not involve the attributes that I'm saying Scholes uniquely brings, old and all as he is.

#15

Mr Alan wrote: »

if cappello thought scholes was englands best bet in midfield for creativity, controlling a game etc, why not include him in all the qualifying games? Or call him up as soon as Capello got the job? he was called up as cover and because he has big game experience-in the same was Carra was.

Because Scholes has **** all interest in being messed around to accomodate lesser players.

The finest English midfielder of his generation being played on the left wing. Gimme a break.

Scholes retired from international football, that's why he was never selected by Capello.

Mr Alan

Gerrard won PFA player of the year playing out wide in 2006. Lampard is playing CM in a 4-4-2, its hardly 'out of position'

Mr.Nice Guy

Mr Alan wrote: »

That makes no sense. Do you think Carragher was called back up to be first choice?

Nope I think he went to the trouble to get Carragher because he didn't like the cover at right-back. I think he went for Scholes because he didn't have faith in the first-choice midfield. That was evident right up to the Japan friendly game.

I'm astonished you think he reached out to Scholes so he could warm the bench. He was twice as good as Gerrard this past season so how would that be logical?

#15

Mr Alan wrote: »

Gerrard won PFA player of the year playing out wide in 2006. Lampard is playing CM in a 4-4-2, its hardly 'out of position'

Well if they are playing in position, they are worse than I thought.

Seriously, both men are suffering because they have the responsibility for moving the ball forward from defence to attack and linking the play.

That is clearly not their strength - it's beyond their capabilities, and it prevents them doing what they are really good at.

Try looking beyond the RTE tactics board - their position is defined by their roles and tasks on the pitch, not what space they occupy on the pitch.

flahavaj

Mr Alan wrote: »

Gerrard won PFA player of the year playing out wide in 2006. Lampard is playing CM in a 4-4-2, its hardly 'out of position'

Again you're trying to make this a Lampard/Gerrard > Scholes argument.

Which it isn't.

magma69

LOL @ this thread.

I knew it would decline into another Man U v Liverpool tit for tat shyte. :rolleyes:

What does it have to do with Rooney's comments about the fans?

Mr Alan

#15, you're aware Gerrard played wide left today, right? both Barry and Lampard share the responsibility to make tackles and move the ball forward, as well as make late runs toward the box-they're not playing well currently, but citing Paul Scholes as a solution for the problem is ridiculous, unless your a scholes fanboy and can't recognise that he is simply not very good anymore.

deisedevil

magma69 wrote: »

LOL @ this thread.

I knew it would decline into another Man U v Liverpool tit for tat shyte. :rolleyes:

What does it have to do with Rooney's comments about the fans?

It's not a Man Utd V Liverpool tit for tat. :rolleyes:

Mr Alan

flahavaj wrote: »

Again you're trying to make this a Lampard/Gerrard > Scholes argument.

Which it isn't.

Ok. Genuinely, with England looking like they'll be favouring 4-4-2, do you genuinely think going on form from this last season that Scholes was a better bet than Lampard/Milner/Barry/Gerrard?

Mr Alan

magma69 wrote: »

LOL @ this thread.

I knew it would decline into another Man U v Liverpool tit for tat shyte. :rolleyes:

What does it have to do with Rooney's comments about the fans?

Who the **** is talking about Liverpool or United?

flahavaj

Mr Alan wrote: »

Ok. Genuinely, with England looking like they'll be favouring 4-4-2, do you genuinely think going on form from this last season that Scholes was a better bet than Lampard/Milner/Barry/Gerrard?

If he'd been playing tonight they'd have passed the ball better and probably would have won.

Personall I think this looks a bit sexy:

---

Rooney

---

J Cole

---

Gerrard

---

Lamps

---

---

Barry

---

Scholes

Also Al, would you agree that England have a serious problem with maintaining quality possesion midfield, a problem that has been exposed time and time again at major tournaments?

abouttobebanned

If he comes out and apologises about this I'll lose all respect for him.

#15

Mr Alan wrote: »

citing Paul Scholes as a solution for the problem is ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous at all, because as much as he has declined, England still don't have a better player in that role.

And that says as much about the state of English football as it does about a 35 year old Scholes.

I don't think we're going to agree, so I'll leave it there, internet arguments are pointless. It's like England-Algeria; nobody's a winner.

Mr Alan

flahavaj wrote: »

If he'd been playing tonight they'd have passed the ball better and probably would have won.

I can't argue with informed excellent logic like that! Ha couldn't i just as easily say if he'd have been playing they'd have lost as the game would have totally passed him by and his passing would have been poor like its been for the majority of the season..... Or that he'd not have had the legs to play in a 4-4-2 and would've got sent off trying to keep up.

deisedevil

flahavaj wrote: »

If he'd been playing tonight they'd have passed the ball better and probably would have won.

Personall I think this looks a bit sexy:

---

Rooney

---

J Cole

---

Gerrard

---

Lamps

---

---

Barry

---

Scholes

Also Al, would you agree that England have a serious problem with maintaining quality possesion midfield, a problem that has been exposed time and time again at major tournaments?

---

Rooney

---

Gerrard

---

Lennon

---

Lamps

---

---

Barry

---

Scholes

I'd rather the above, but could always have Joe Cole off the bench or Wright-Phillips depending on what you want. But I like what you did there.

DeVore

#15 wrote: »

It's not ridiculous at all, because as much as he has declined, England still don't have a better player in that role.

And that says as much about the state of English football as it does about a 35 year old Scholes.

I don't think we're going to agree, so I'll leave it there, internet arguments are pointless. It's like England-Algeria; nobody's a winner.

I think we can all agree... Algeria won that


Even the English fans agree

DeV.

KittyeeTrix

Roobish is one of the headlines in one of the English tabloids!!:eek:
backlash has begun

Mr Alan

flahavaj wrote: »

Also Al, would you agree that England have a serious problem with maintaining quality possesion midfield, a problem that has been exposed time and time again at major tournaments?

Yea, i'd agree with that, however they didn't have the same problem in qualification when using the same players. I don't think the players at their disposal is their issue, they seem to be just totally bottling it with various players in poor form at the wrong time.

flahavaj

Mr Alan wrote: »

I can't argue with informed excellent logic like that! Ha couldn't i just as easily say if he'd have been playing they'd have lost as the game would have totally passed him by and his passing would have been poor like its been for the majority of the season..... Or that he'd not have had the legs to play in a 4-4-2 and would've got sent off trying to keep up.

Tonight's game would have been perfect for him actually. It wasn't played at a breakneck pace. The amount of times Carragher or Terry had the ball and eitehr played it long or passed it to James who did the same was astonishing. Scholes would have excelled in a deep lying role receiving it deep from the centre backs and dictating the flow of the game. He's exactly what they were crying out for. No combination of any of England's current midfielders could have done that. Barry was brutal and the game passed him by, completely.

Mr Alan

DeVore wrote: »

I think we can all agree... Algeria won that


Even the English fans agree

DeV.

Pfft, newbie :rolleyes:

leninbenjamin

Mr Alan wrote: »

Yea, i'd agree with that, however they didn't have the same problem in qualification when using the same players. I don't think the players at their disposal is their issue, they seem to be just totally bottling it with various players in poor form at the wrong time.

In case you hadn't noticed, they relied on Heskey to make up for their inability to pass through midfield. Sadly Heskey is hopelessly out of form.

Columbia

I know people in England that have put themselves into debt to go over there and watch the three English group games.

If I had made that sacrifice, and I had just watched a bunch of multi-millionaire playboys thank me by serving up that steaming pile of you-know-what for the second time in a row, boo would be the absolute least I'd have done.

The "Golden Generation" they're called. Beckham, Rio, Terry, Ashley Cole, Joe Cole, Gerrard, every one of them has at some point or other emerged as a cheating, lying, backstabbing clown. Maybe if the England team wasn't so full of playboys they'd have a chance, maybe if Capello stuck to his promise and picked players on form, they'd actually have to perform on the pitch. Unfortunately, the English national team is just a boys club these days, and the result of that is performances like tonight.

flahavaj

Mr Alan wrote: »

Yea, i'd agree with that, however they didn't have the same problem in qualification when using the same players. I don't think the players at their disposal is their issue, they seem to be just totally bottling it with various players in poor form at the wrong time.

I think the major issue English football has had for the last 20 years is the lack of more skilful midfield players who are comfortable on the ball. I think its a bit simplistic to say they're simply "bottling" it. The problem is a more more deep lying and fundamental one.

Only Gazza and Scholes really fit that description. Lamps and Gerrard are lads who do their best stuff in the final third. They have no one who is outstanding (or even decent) at running the game in the middle third.

postalservice

fluffyorganic1 wrote: »

Roobish is one of the headlines in one of the English tabloids!!:eek:
backlash has begun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idLG6jh23yE

The nike ad seems to be playing out !!!! :eek:

Jordan Berbatov

Dont agree with what Rooney done, but at least he showed a bit of passion unlike the most uninspiring captain at the world cup, Steven Gerrard.

Livvie

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

They spent £1000's travelling to SA expecting to see their team who are ranked 8th in the world put in a good performance against a team 22 places below them.

If the players are happy to accept the applause when they play well then they should accept the boos when they don't.

Agreed. They're already on a pedestal, and undeservedly. Booing after a dire game should spur them on.

They should support the team during the game though.

The fans must have been as frustrated as the team. They'll be there on Wednesday supporting them.

Mr Alan

i love the way no one can make up their mind who the scape goat is cause everyone has been mainly poor for them

rossie1977

scholes would have made no difference, england are a bunch of individuals pretending to be a team

rooney is in poor form lets be honest the guys hasn't scored since march, has lampard ever played well for england?? gerrard's coming off the back of his worst ever season, heskey should not be near an international team, lennon is completely out of his depth at international level

Seaneh

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

They spent £1000's travelling to SA expecting to see their team who are ranked 8th in the world put in a good performance against a team 22 places below them.

If the players are happy to accept the applause when they play well then they should accept the boos when they don't.

So when Man utd lost to leeds, ranked what, 50 odd places below them in the league last year the united fans would have been justified in booing their players?

It's a one off match on a tournement, upsets happen, blame the manager, his tactics were wrong, booing the players is a stupid, it acomplishes nothing and just makes them stop caring. If you want someone to do somehting, cheer them on, encourage them, don't be a ****ing idiot and boo the team you are there to support!

rossie1977

Seaneh wrote: »

So when Man utd lost to leeds, ranked what, 50 odd places below them in the league last year the united fans would have been justified in booing their players?

man utd have been successful last 20 years whereas england have won nothing in almost 50. the utd fans care little about an fa cup game nowadays as they know they will challenge for europe/league anyway. during the 80s the utd fans often vented their frustrations at players and managers when they were not winning things

glenjamin

Fcuk sake this is ridiculous, they aren't even out or anything! The fans should be rallying behind them for their final game and save the booing if they don't win that. Typical English reaction.

Pro. F

The English fans booing their team tonight was idiotic. The fact that they travelled far to watch doesn't give them any special excuse for acting like tools.

He was right to be pissed off with them and him venting that at the camera was no big deal.

x in the city

It was a bs performance and its rich coming from some uber star like rooney, he should be setting an example for others.

if you put a head of hair on him tonight you wouldn't tell he is a player Madrid would pay 100 million form or whatever money they have floating about nowadays. :rolleyes:

x in the city

Pro. F wrote: »

The English fans booing their team tonight was idiotic. The fact that they travelled far to watch doesn't give them any special excuse for acting like tools.

He was right to be pissed off with them and him venting that at the camera was no big deal.

it was a inept performance from like ALL the English team

what do you expect, lol

booing is for tools I agree, but he can hardly be surprised.

They had 1 solidarity shot on target in the whole friggin game from frankie, ffs

KittyeeTrix

x in the city wrote: »

it was a inept performance from like ALL the English team

what do you expect, lol

booing is for tools I agree, but he can hardly be surprised.

They had 1 solidarity shot on target in the whole friggin game from frankie, ffs

SSN said earlier that Rooney had 1 shot on target and 1 shot off target...:o

Very poor show indeed (by them all)

Yakult

I'd be pretty pissed off if I went all the way to Africa to support a team of quality players playing as badly as that. Wouldnt do it myself, but Lets hope the boo'ing hit the players and wake them up a bit.

Degag

I don't know if it's been said already lads, but in recent times our own team have gone off the pitch (at half time let alone full time) to the chorus of boos.

To address the fellow who asked if the fans spent 1000s of euros to go to the World Cup to see their team draw with an inferior team, why did they spend all that money to boo their team? If i went to the World Cup to support my team i would stand and applaud them off the field even if they lost 5-0. That's the way it should be.

gingelion

To be honest i've only read the first few replies but **** it.

England are always terrible. and this time they are terrible again. its funny, they build themselves up into world beaters every tournament, but think about it, when is the last time england played well as a team.

probably 2 years ago. ENGLAND ARE REALLY BAD.its no surprise to sit around and watch them be really bad at football........,,,,,,,,,,,,, again!

kronsington

even though a lot of them are witless muppets, the englans fans are perfectly entitled to express their dissatisfaction with the teams pathetically inept gutless performance. it was truly pitiful. agaisnt ALGERIA! had i forked out the cash to get there i would be ****** furious with the team. most of them, clearly, dont like playing for england, its a chore above anything. supporters are perfectly entitled to let the players and staff know how they feel when a team that is expected to challenge for this trophy perform woefully below par. rooney, gerrard and the rest of this lot need to put all their crap aside and actually do it. i understand rooney's reaction at full time, but perhaps he should take a step back and try realise what has happened from the point of view of the common england fan.absolutely pathetic result tonight.