Continuing Hodgson/Ferdinand/Terry Controversy

cgpg5

eagle eye wrote: »

I remember the game where that happened. Warnock never had a substitute keeper when Paddy Kenny played for Sheffield United. And then he got injured during a game and Jagielka stepped in and played really well.

Was only against the Arsenal I remember. held out to win 1 nil despite Jag playing the majority of the game in goal!

Pighead

G.K. wrote: »

@Pighead: No. They both have a player who could deputise at full-back - Maniatis and Schaars, but they are both midfielders by trade.

Ah I see. Was thinking it was a bit strange that the Dutch in particulat were so defence heavy.

peabutler

I think the horrible squad selection decisions is feeding into this whole under the radar England tripe thats been tossed about the last few weeks, when you consider that 3 potential starters (Ferdinand, Richards and Carrick) have been left at home because of poor player/manager relations it must be a hard pill to swallow for English fans.

eagle eye

peabutler wrote: »

I think the horrible squad selection decisions is feeding into this whole under the radar England tripe thats been tossed about the last few weeks, when you consider that 3 potential starters (Ferdinand, Richards and Carrick) have been left at home because of poor player/manager relations it must be a hard pill to swallow for English fans.

Two of them would not go on the standby list so its probably their own fault that they are not going now.

Glico Man

eagle eye wrote: »

Two of them would not go on the standby list so its probably their own fault that they are not going now.

Same could be said for Ben Foster who didn't want to make himself available, and Butland gets called up as a result.

CSF

aaronh007 wrote: »

Same could be said for Ben Foster who didn't want to make himself available, and Butland gets called up as a result.

Foster didn't want to go as anything other than number 1. He ain't worried about Butland getting in.

Leiva

Rio & his agent really should just shut up and let this farce unfold on front of them .

Sometimes staying quiet speaks louder.

Paul Tergat

Leiva wrote: »

Rio & his agent really should just shut up and let this farce unfold on front of them .

Sometimes staying quiet speaks louder.

He's kept quiet for quite a long time considering its his brother involved in this.

The major fault has to lie with the FA imo

Beefy78

CSF wrote: »

The point is that Hodgson screamed from the rooftops that it wasn't to do with that. Eyebrows were raised at the time, and I never believed it but todays incidents have proved beyond doubt what a classless man Roy Hodgson is, although I had suspected it since the squad was announced.

He's trying to be tactful. We all know why Rio isn't going but he can't say the real reason while there's a court case going through.

Personally I wouldn't have taken either Ferdinand or Terry, at least before all England's players started getting injured. I think they're both past it. If I was only going to take one then nowadays I think that would probably be Terry. Fergie didn't do Rio many favours with what he had to say about him the other week either.

You can't have two guys in the same squad who can't stand each other, especially when they're both big personalities, are both natural leaders and when your squad is going to be spending up to a month in a small hotel living on top of each other.

Beefy78

CSF wrote: »

Foster didn't want to go as anything other than number 1. He ain't worried about Butland getting in.

He should be. Butland is a top keeper who could be England no.1 for years to come.

CSF

Beefy78 wrote: »

He's trying to be tactful. We all know why Rio isn't going but he can't say the real reason while there's a court case going through.

Personally I wouldn't have taken either Ferdinand or Terry, at least before all England's players started getting injured. I think they're both past it. If I was only going to take one then nowadays I think that would probably be Terry. Fergie didn't do Rio many favours with what he had to say about him the other week either.

You can't have two guys in the same squad who can't stand each other, especially when they're both big personalities, are both natural leaders and when your squad is going to be spending up to a month in a small hotel living on top of each other.

Em John Terry racially abused Rio Ferdinand's brother. I don't know what part of that you're missing. Terry shouldn't be anywhere near the England squad and wouldn't be if Hodgson had an ounce of class. Look at the Italian lad charged with match-fixing, straight out of the squad.

But not only is Terry still in the squad, the brother of his victim is losing out on being there as a result. Disgraceful stuff. It defies belief and only a classless individual like Hodgson would allow it.

monkey9

If the two of them can't be in the same squad, then it should be Terry left out on his ear, not Ferdinand. It's John Terry who's the one on trial. Rio Ferdinand has done nothing wrong here.

Leiva

monkey9 wrote: »

If the two of them can't be in the same squad, then it should be Terry left out on his ear, not Ferdinand. It's John Terry who's the one on trial. Rio Ferdinand has done nothing wrong here.

One word my friend. :

WOY !

Paul Tergat

I suppose being fair to Hodgson its a tough position to be in. He was in a no win really

Feels he cant take them both

Judges JT is the better player (I agree fwiw)

If he leaves Terry behind then we get the whole innocent until proven guilty argument. If he takes Terry he then feels he cant take Rio.

I think the FA should have done more in the situation.

Optimalprimerib

hungoverbunny wrote: »

what about micah richards

He's black so he can't play with terry. Ashley cole is ok as terry had to come accustomed to him.

Beefy78

CSF wrote: »

Em John Terry racially abused Rio Ferdinand's brother. I don't know what part of that you're missing. Terry shouldn't be anywhere near the England squad and wouldn't be if Hodgson had an ounce of class. Look at the Italian lad charged with match-fixing, straight out of the squad.

But not only is Terry still in the squad, the brother of his victim is losing out on being there as a result. Disgraceful stuff. It defies belief and only a classless individual like Hodgson would allow it.

Only a classless individual like Hodgson? And yet Capello resigned over Terry having the captaincy taken off of him so its no stretch to assume that he would have taken him. And Redknapp said that he'd have taken them both (not sure how that would have worked, mind). So that's three classless individuals.

And two Chelsea managers have picked Terry since his alleged crime.

Ferdinand isn't out of the squad because Terry allegedly racially abused his brother. Ferdinand is out of the squad because he is upset that Terry allegedly racially abused his brother. I'm sure that's the natural response but it is that situation which has caused this.

I'm not defending John Terry. I've already said that I wouldn't have picked him myself and I got an infraction on here for saying what I feel about that individual, but in the eyes of the law he is currently not guilty.

You're coming across as having a personal axe to grind with Hodgson, tbh.

Beefy78

Paul Tergat wrote: »

I suppose being fair to Hodgson its a tough position to be in. He was in a no win really

Feels he cant take them both

Judges JT is the better player (I agree fwiw)

If he leaves Terry behind then we get the whole innocent until proven guilty argument. If he takes Terry he then feels he cant take Rio.

I think the FA should have done more in the situation.

Great post. I agree entirely.

He's been left in a decision where he feels he has to pick the one he believes to be the better defender now and that is what he's done.

The FA should have taken the decision out of his hands before he got the job. This is EXACTLY what I said would happen when they said he couldn't be captain but could go to the tournament.

monkey9

Both players told Hodgson they would play with the other according to reports. I heard it on the radio so have no link!!

Leiva

Paul Tergat wrote: »

I suppose being fair to Hodgson its a tough position to be in. He was in a no win really

Feels he cant take them both

Judges JT is the better player (I agree fwiw)

If he leaves Terry behind then we get the whole innocent until proven guilty argument. If he takes Terry he then feels he cant take Rio.

I think the FA should have done more in the situation.

I think most would agree with you but why Kelly and not Richards ?

monkey9

I think Ferdinand is the better player, tbh. But as already been mentioned, Ferdinand can play football so he's not Hodgson's type of player!

Paul Tergat

Beefy78 wrote: »

Ferdinand isn't out of the squad because Terry allegedly racially abused his brother. Ferdinand is out of the squad because he is upset that Terry allegedly racially abused his brother. I'm sure that's the natural response but it is that situation which has caused this.

I'm not defending John Terry. I've already said that I wouldn't have picked him myself and I got an infraction on here for saying what I feel about that individual, but in the eyes of the law he is currently not guilty.
.

This line seems a bit weird. Surely one follows the other? Im 99% sure you are not, given the proceeding paragraph, but it almost looks like some blame is attached to Rio which I think is totally unfair.

I think the first 2 sentences I highlighted are the same thing in reality

Paul Tergat

Leiva wrote: »

I think most would agree with you but why Kelly and not Richards ?

Totally agree and its something I have gone over in the other thread - getting confusing now!

Its more a badly handled squad selection from start to finish imo

monkey9

Leiva wrote: »

I think most would agree with you but why Kelly and not Richards ?

Richards refused to go on the standby list and went on holidays. Capello never picked Richards either!!

There must be something going on with Richards that we don't know about, he's obviously good enough to be in the squad.

Paul Tergat

Is this whole refusing to be on the standby list a relatively new thing or what? Its not something I recall hearing about before

CSF

Paul Tergat wrote: »

I suppose being fair to Hodgson its a tough position to be in. He was in a no win really

Feels he cant take them both

Judges JT is the better player (I agree fwiw)

If he leaves Terry behind then we get the whole innocent until proven guilty argument. If he takes Terry he then feels he cant take Rio.

I think the FA should have done more in the situation.

We are all witnesses to John Terry's crime, we are all capable of making our own judgement on it, as witnesses without needing a court to tell us what happened, Roy Hodgson included. As I keep repeating, if Hodgson had witnessed Terry committing a crime that he took seriously, he would have been dropped. Unfortunately, clearly Hodgson doesn't take racism seriously.

Beefy78 wrote: »

Only a classless individual like Hodgson? And yet Capello resigned over Terry having the captaincy taken off of him so its no stretch to assume that he would have taken him. And Redknapp said that he'd have taken them both (not sure how that would have worked, mind). So that's three classless individuals.

And two Chelsea managers have picked Terry since his alleged crime.

Ferdinand isn't out of the squad because Terry allegedly racially abused his brother. Ferdinand is out of the squad because he is upset that Terry allegedly racially abused his brother. I'm sure that's the natural response but it is that situation which has caused this.

I'm not defending John Terry. I've already said that I wouldn't have picked him myself and I got an infraction on here for saying what I feel about that individual, but in the eyes of the law he is currently not guilty.

You're coming across as having a personal axe to grind with Hodgson, tbh.

Capello showed his level of class long before with the Bridge situation, as for Redknapp, I don't even need to argue that.

I do have a personal axe to grind with Hodgson, it began the day he announced his Euro 2012 squad.

Beefy78

Paul Tergat wrote: »

This line seems a bit weird. Surely one follows the other? Im 99% sure you are not, given the proceeding paragraph, but it almost looks like some blame is attached to Rio which I think is totally unfair.

I think the first 2 sentences I highlighted are the same thing in reality

Obviously one did lead onto the other, but the reason I'm trying to make the distinction is because CSF has made the claim several times that Rio has been dropped because he's got a black brother who John Terry racially abused. Whilst that may or may not be the case the pertinent point is that Rio has been dropped because there's a serious personal issue between he and John Terry.

monkey9 said that both players had said on the radio that they would play with each other, which I do believe is the case, but I'd assume the issue isn't the 90 minutes on the pitch which is the worry, it's the other 22 and a half hours of the day.

Leiva

Pack of jumped up millionaires ... Fück em !

C'mon Ireland :pac:

CSF

Paul Tergat wrote: »

Is this whole refusing to be on the standby list a relatively new thing or what? Its not something I recall hearing about before

I don't think it is anything particularly official. Richards just decided to go on holidays, rather than wait around for someone to get injured, and to be honest, given that he is easily the best player England have in his position, he is probably right.

Beefy78

Paul Tergat wrote: »

Is this whole refusing to be on the standby list a relatively new thing or what? Its not something I recall hearing about before

It has been stated as fact today on twitter by a number of footballers and journalists. I don't recall it being mentioned before. Seemingly he was asked to be on the standby list after missing the original squad and declined and went on holiday instead.

CSF

Beefy78 wrote: »

Obviously one did lead onto the other, but the reason I'm trying to make the distinction is because CSF has made the claim several times that Rio has been dropped because he's got a black brother who John Terry racially abused. Whilst that may or may not be the case the pertinent point is that Rio has been dropped because there's a serious personal issue between he and John Terry.

monkey9 said that both players had said on the radio that they would play with each other, which I do believe is the case, but I'd assume the issue isn't the 90 minutes on the pitch which is the worry, it's the other 22 and a half hours of the day.

The personal issue is pretty much a given, and thus doesn't even merit a mention. The root of the whole issue is that Ferdinand has missed out on Euro 2012 because John Terry racially abused his brother.

Yes, if Rio thought racism was ok, and let it go, then he might have made it, but thats such a flimsy argument that it should really be left as a passing thought.

monkey9

I think the simple question to ask is do people think that if what happened at Loftus Road last October didn't occur, would Rio Ferdinand be in the England squad for this tournament?

My answer is yes, yes he would. Which is why i think it's a joke he has been left out and John Terry is in!!

Gbear

CSF wrote: »

Look at the Italian lad charged with match-fixing, straight out of the squad.

You're making an assumption (maybe correctly but it's still an assumption).

The police raided his hotel room, clearly to stir ****. I think his being dropped was down to the goings on affecting his performance.

Beefy78 wrote: »

And yet Capello resigned over Terry having the captaincy taken off of him so its no stretch to assume that he would have taken him.

I think Capello resigned not because Terry was dropped but because it was done without his consent.

As much as anything I'd say he used it as an excuse to get out.

With all players fit i'd have had neither tbh. Rio because he's ould and they need to be moving on. Terry because... well... you know. Neither deserve to start at any rate. I dunno if they'd have been left out entirely would their ego's have permitted them to come in as cover for the injured players. Perhaps.

Cahill, Lescott, Johnson, Cole as the starters and Richards, Jones and Baines as cover.

Paul Tergat

CSF wrote: »

We are all witnesses to John Terry's crime, we are all capable of making our own judgement on it, as witnesses without needing a court to tell us what happened, Roy Hodgson included. As I keep repeating, if Hodgson had witnessed Terry committing a crime that he took seriously, he would have been dropped. Unfortunately, clearly Hodgson doesn't take racism seriously.


Capello showed his level of class long before with the Bridge situation, as for Redknapp, I don't even need to argue that.
.

But my point is its a tough spot for Roy. He has to follow protocol. As I said before, the FA should be helping him more in this tricky spot. i dont think you can leap to the conclusion he doesnt take racism seriously, he has toe be careful in his actions

Beefy78 wrote: »

Obviously one did lead onto the other, but the reason I'm trying to make the distinction is because CSF has made the claim several times that Rio has been dropped because he's got a black brother who John Terry racially abused. Whilst that may or may not be the case the pertinent point is that Rio has been dropped because there's a serious personal issue between he and John Terry.

monkey9 said that both players had said on the radio that they would play with each other, which I do believe is the case, but I'd assume the issue isn't the 90 minutes on the pitch which is the worry, it's the other 22 and a half hours of the day.

Agree the disruption to the squad is likely an issue. Again though, I just dont think that in practice there is really any such distinction. They are the same thing here really!

CSF wrote: »

I don't think it is anything particularly official. Richards just decided to go on holidays, rather than wait around for someone to get injured, and to be honest, given that he is easily the best player England have in his position, he is probably right.

Beefy78 wrote: »

It has been stated as fact today on twitter by a number of footballers and journalists. I don't recall it being mentioned before. Seemingly he was asked to be on the standby list after missing the original squad and declined and went on holiday instead.

Ok. So is the case with Carrick different? I thought both were cases where they didnt want to be hanging around and be drafted in as replacements where they would not be first teamers

Turtyturd

Paul Tergat wrote: »

But my point is its a tough spot for Roy. He has to follow protocol. As I said before, the FA should be helping him more in this tricky spot. i dont think you can leap to the conclusion he doesnt take racism seriously, he has toe be careful in his actions

I don't think the FA can step in in any way other then reaffirming what Hodgson has said, but they are happy to let Hodgson draw the flack for this.

Terry is still considered innocent until at least after the court case. If Terry is removed by them he would most likely have a case for unfairly being removed from the squad. If they leave it to Hodgson he could at least come up with a reason which while maybe seeming stupid would be hard to argue against.

Beefy78

Paul Tergat wrote: »

Ok. So is the case with Carrick different? I thought both were cases where they didnt want to be hanging around and be drafted in as replacements where they would not be first teamers

I'm not sure if Carrick did ask to not on the standby list. I know that is the story which went around but Hodgson said at the press conference or shortly afterwards and Carrick had told the FA a year or more ago that he didn't want to be a bit-part player for England. Robinson and Foster have both said similar things.

The Richards thing is unfortunate. I'm in the camp that would have him as first choice every time but it does seem a bit childish to say that he won't be on the standby list because he didn't make the squad. He has said in many interviews what a bit dream it is of his to play for England again yet he was nowhere near the squad under Capello. I just think he should have put his holiday off for a week or two.

I find it difficult to defend anyone who would decline any opportunity to compete for an England cap, to be honest. That's one thing I will say about Ferdinand and Terry - both clearly loved playing for England.

CSF

Paul Tergat wrote: »

But my point is its a tough spot for Roy. He has to follow protocol. As I said before, the FA should be helping him more in this tricky spot. i dont think you can leap to the conclusion he doesnt take racism seriously, he has toe be careful in his actions

Its really not that tricky, Hodgson in this situation has to either bring Ferdinand and Terry(and perform miracles of great size in making it work), or just bring Ferdinand, the third one (the one he has chosen) is not an acceptable option.

Paul Tergat

Turtyturd wrote: »

I don't think the FA can step in in any way other then reaffirming what Hodgson has said, but they are happy to let Hodgson draw the flack for this.

Terry is still considered innocent until at least after the court case. If Terry is removed by them he would most likely have a case for unfairly being removed from the squad. If they leave it to Hodgson he could at least come up with a reason which while maybe seeming stupid would be hard to argue against.

CSF wrote: »

Its really not that tricky, Hodgson in this situation has to either bring Ferdinand and Terry(and perform miracles of great size in making it work), or just bring Ferdinand, the third one (the one he has chosen) is not an acceptable option.

See. This is a no win for Roy imo and the positions you both took show a great example of why this is the case. Its clear the reason given is not hard to argue against but then its innocent until proven guilty.

Beefy78 wrote: »

I find it difficult to defend anyone who would decline any opportunity to compete for an England cap, to be honest. That's one thing I will say about Ferdinand and Terry - both clearly loved playing for England.

This is a good point and I think one thing is becoming clear that pride/playing for your country is being diluted imo as club football has well overtaken it

Turtyturd

Beefy78 wrote: »

I find it difficult to defend anyone who would decline any opportunity to compete for an England cap, to be honest. That's one thing I will say about Ferdinand and Terry - both clearly loved playing for England.

Players should be happy to play for their country but I can understand why someone like Richards opted out, he should have been a cert and to be waiting on the sideline is a big blow to his pride especially when his teammates are in the squad.

Beefy78

Paul Tergat wrote: »

This is a good point and I think one thing is becoming clear that pride/playing for your country is being diluted imo as club football has well overtaken it

Yet look who are the players who clearly love turning up game in game out, tournament in tournament out. Rooney, Ferdinand, Lampard, Terry, Cole, Gerrard. These guys are winners, playing for huge clubs, winning everything they can win at Club level yet they show how much International football means to them. The players who we're talking about tend not to have done anything like as well in their club careers.

eagle eye

CSF wrote: »

Its really not that tricky, Hodgson in this situation has to either bring Ferdinand and Terry(and perform miracles of great size in making it work), or just bring Ferdinand, the third one (the one he has chosen) is not an acceptable option.

Nobody likes John Terry 'the person' but as a footballer he is streets ahead of anybody else at centreback for England right now. Hodgson had a tough choice to make but his decision has to be based on football, and giving England the best chance to succeed in Ukraine/Poland, and not political correctness. He made the right decision.

Paul Tergat

Beefy78 wrote: »

Yet look who are the players who clearly love turning up game in game out, tournament in tournament out. Rooney, Ferdinand, Lampard, Terry, Cole, Gerrard. These guys are winners, playing for huge clubs, winning everything they can win at Club level yet they show how much International football means to them. The players who we're talking about tend not to have done anything like as well in their club careers.

I dont think they play as well for the countries as they do clubs but I dont really want to get into that debate.

LuckyLloyd

Two little irritants in this thread thus far:

- People saying 'oh but Capello wasn't sacked, he resigned'. Meh, they made his position completely untenable. They got him out without having to technically fire him, but make no mistake about it - the FA knew the likely consequences of what they were doing and went right ahead;
- People saying 'Ferdinand is right to complain!' Well, yeah, he has a clear and genuine grievance but surely inarticulate rants on twitter help no-one? They especially don't help the players over there. It's all very egotistical. By all means voice your displeasure. But do it via a press release after you've chewed through it with your advisors / circle of friends / etc;

CSF wrote: »

To be honest, and I didn't at the time, but stuff like this can only make you feel sorry for Suarez. Shocking contrast in treatment between the 2.

As was pointed out ad nauseum at the time, but was wilfully ignored by those gleefully nailing him and LFC to the cross.

rarnes1 wrote: »

The knives are sharpening for Hodgson already. Out of his depth again.

Lovely man though..

Any proper consideration of his failed tenure at Liverpool should have invalidated him as a candidate for England. He just doesn't deal with media spotlight and large egos well.

monkey9

Paul Tergat wrote: »

I dont think they play as well for the countries as they do clubs but I dont really want to get into that debate.

You could say that about a lot of players!! John Barnes seemed a completely different player for England compared to the genius that appeared in a red shirt (apart from the Brazil goal and the free kick against the Netherlands at Wembley!!

Beefy78

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

As was pointed out ad nauseum at the time, but was wilfully ignored by those gleefully nailing him and LFC to the cross.

Well we shall see what sort of ban Terry gets if he gets found guilty by the FA. I suspect it'll be at least as long as the one Suarez got. Until then it's impossible to say if Suarez got a raw deal in comparison.

Paul Tergat

monkey9 wrote: »

You could say that about a lot of players!! John Barnes seemed a completely different player for England compared to the genius that appeared in a red shirt (apart from the Brazil goal and the free kick against the Netherlands at Wembley!!

I guess. Maybe its just that the English team is getting worse and so I think its that those selected just arent as bothered whereas its that they are just not as good.

Paul Tergat

Beefy78 wrote: »

Well we shall see what sort of ban Terry gets if he gets found guilty by the FA. I suspect it'll be at least as long as the one Suarez got. Until then it's impossible to say if Suarez got a raw deal in comparison.

I think the point being made is that Suarez got a load of press associated with it and less of the innocent until proven guilty attitude that has been afforded to Terry

Beefy78

Paul Tergat wrote: »

I think the point being made is that Suarez got a load of press associated with it and less of the innocent until proven guilty attitude that has been afforded to Terry

I think Liverpool's reaction did a lot to fuel the press associated with it. I also think that there's been a limit to what sort of details the press could go into whilst the CPS were looking into it and certainly since they decided to prosecute.

CSF

eagle eye wrote: »

Nobody likes John Terry 'the person' but as a footballer he is streets ahead of anybody else at centreback for England right now. Hodgson had a tough choice to make but his decision has to be based on football, and giving England the best chance to succeed in Ukraine/Poland, and not political correctness. He made the right decision.

Political correctness? Are you having a laugh? Well you may not take racism very seriously, but the majority of people do.

Turtyturd

CSF wrote: »

Political correctness? Are you having a laugh? Well you may not take racism very seriously, but the majority of people do.

It's alleged racism at this stage.

CSF

Turtyturd wrote: »

It's alleged racism at this stage.

We don't have to talk like lawyers here. We've seen the video, we know he is guilty.