Continuing Hodgson/Ferdinand/Terry Controversy

Beefy78

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Richards should have been on the original list, and asked to be ruled out after hearing the news as he was sick of continuing disappointments for England. I'm sure he thought after Capello things may change for him.

They had changed. He'd gone from being completely frozen out to being told that he'd missed out on the squad by a hair. He then chose to throw a strop and stick two fingers up at his country. Screw him.

MagicMarker

djfitzerjnr wrote: »

So because the media-darling had a few good games at the start of the season, a full 8-10 months before the actual tournament, he should be there ahead of 2 better players that had better seasons? ha ha ha!

Where did I say any of that?

djfitzerjnr

Hulk Hands wrote: »

I've watched a lot of Liverpool for a few years, and even at their peak (08-09), I always though Johnson was the weak link. Reina still had a decent season as keepers go. When Enrique's form went, so did your defensive record. It was the best in the league in the 1st half of the season.

Well seeing as Liverpool's RB that season was Alvaro Arbeloa, it would be difficult for Pompey's Johnson to be a weak link for Liverpool.

Actually, it's no coincedence that Liverpool's defensive record was worse when Johnson was not in the team, not Enrique.

djfitzerjnr

MagicMarker wrote: »

Where did I say any of that?

could have sword that said 'ahead', not 'after'. anyways...

Drumpot

djfitzerjnr wrote: »

So who would be the back up RB so? The 'greatest person in the history of football after Scotty Parker' Phil Jones, who cannot cross and is caught out of position every other minute? Or Micah 'too good for England' Richards? Kelly is the best viable option for the slot, and is versatile too.

The highlighted bit, no surprises on the basis of your argument then.

Kelly replaced Gary Cahill who is a cb not a rb. Are you suggesting hodgson didn't choose a sufficient amount of rbs in his initial squad choice?

Also jones played more games for a vastly superior team , picked regularly by a vastly superir manager this season. I think his place is more then justified as a utility player.

MagicMarker

djfitzerjnr wrote: »

could have sword that said 'ahead', not 'after'. anyways...

I didn't mention the Euros at all or who should be ahead of Jones or not, all I said was when on form Jones would be my 3rd choice RB.

Please do try and read my posts properly.

Beefy78

Drumpot wrote: »

Kelly replaced Gary Cahill who is a cb not a rb. Are you suggesting hodgson didn't choose a sufficient amount of rbs in his initial squad choice?

It doesn't matter who he was replacing. Phil Jones was nominally covering right-back but now is nominally covering central midfield. Had Ferdinand been called up yesterday then England would have had one guy (Jones) covering right-back and the holding role in midfield.

Cahill may be a centre back but the logical move was to replace him with either a right back or a midfielder, which is what Hodgson did.

If Ferdinand was to get in then it would have been ahead of Jagielka.

ricero

Ferdinand and his agent are just completely embarrassing themselves by this stage and are best to keep their mouths shut. your not in the squad Rio and you wont be either so best forget about and get behind your country and stop this divide that you are creating.

also the only reason he is not in the squad is because the fa chose terry over Rio due to his brother Anton's allegations that terry racially abused him. i also believe now after Hodgsons preference of JT that he will get away with this racial abuse case.

Beefy78

ricero wrote: »

Ferdinand and his agent are just completely embarrassing themselves by this stage and are best to keep their mouths shut. your not in the squad Rio and you wont be either so best forget about and get behind your country and stop this divide that you are creating.

also the only reason he is not in the squad is because the fa chose terry over Rio due to his brother Anton's allegations that terry racially abused him.i also believe now after Hodgsons preference of JT that he will get away with this racial abuse case.

That's quite the stretch there. You think that Roy Hodgson has sway over the British judicial system?

Hulk Hands

djfitzerjnr wrote: »

Well seeing as Liverpool's RB that season was Alvaro Arbeloa, it would be difficult for Pompey's Johnson to be a weak link for Liverpool.

Actually, it's no coincedence that Liverpool's defensive record was worse when Johnson was not in the team, not Enrique.

Ah yes, apologies. So he came in just around the same time Liverpool got much worse?

The one time I was impressed by Johnson was when playing on the right wing for Portsmouth. Has that ever been an option, with your lack of wingers and Kelly's apparant brilliance as a RB?

ricero

Beefy78 wrote: »

That's quite the stretch there. You think that Roy Hodgson has sway over the British judicial system?

no but i think due to Hodgsons and the fa picking JT over Ferdinand that they believe Terry will get away with it. they must of seen the evidence and made a decisive and well thought decision. it will be a pr disaster if terry is charged after the tournament for the fa

monkey9

ricero wrote: »

no but i think due to Hodgsons and the fa picking JT over Ferdinand that they believe Terry will get away with it. they must of seen the evidence and made a decisive and well thought decision. it will be a pr disaster if terry is charged after the tournament for the fa

So why did they take the captaincy off him?

recylingbin

Hodgson couldn't pick Rio cos the France game clashed with Usher at the Appollo.

Drumpot

Beefy78 wrote: »

It doesn't matter who he was replacing. Phil Jones was nominally covering right-back but now is nominally covering central midfield. Had Ferdinand been called up yesterday then England would have had one guy (Jones) covering right-back and the holding role in midfield.

Cahill may be a centre back but the logical move was to replace him with either a right back or a midfielder, which is what Hodgson did.

If Ferdinand was to get in then it would have been ahead of Jagielka.

It doesn't matter who he was replacing? I think it matters very much because had Cahill not gotten injured England would by your logic still be short at RB.

ricero

monkey9 wrote: »

So why did they take the captaincy off him?

i dunno the only reason i see was that a couple of months ago when they did take it off him they were sure he would be found guilty. maybe they have called in the experts since then and seen that he has a favorable chance to get away with it .

anyway back to Ferdinand i think his behavior is disgraceful and proper disrupting to the team before the tournament.

Beefy78

ricero wrote: »

no but i think due to Hodgsons and the fa picking JT over Ferdinand that they believe Terry will get away with it. they must of seen the evidence and made a decisive and well thought decision. it will be a pr disaster if terry is charged after the tournament for the fa

Fair enough, I got what you meant backwards.

I don't think that's necessarily the case though. The CPS obviously think there's a case to answer and I believe that it has gone to only a Magistrates Court so it'll be down solely to the opinion of the Judge on the day.

Beefy78

Drumpot wrote: »

It doesn't matter who he was replacing? I think it matters very much because had Cahill not gotten injured England would by your logic still be short at RB.

I think Jagielka was covering in the event that Jones was needed in midfield, and Milner could have done so at a push. The squad balance is much, much better with bringing in a right back to replace Cahill either way.

ebbsy

Ferdinand is in no position to talk about moral issues after missing that drugs test.

And missing one is the same as failing one.

Well done Mr. Hodgson.

niallo27

recylingbin wrote: »

Hodgson couldn't pick Rio cos the France game clashed with Usher at the Appollo.

This did make me laugh.

ricero

ricero wrote: »

anyway back to Ferdinand i think his behavior is disgraceful and proper disrupting to the team before the tournament.

I think this point is being lost amongst everything.

cournioni

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If you judge defenders based purely on the goals their team concedes then that is ridiculous.

Not purely on it, but it gives a great indication of how well a player has done over the course of a season. Especially as Ferdinand was one of Uniteds most consistent and had more appearances than most in the United line up. If you can come up with a better judgement of a player than that then please elaborate a little.

Terry and Chelsea haven't performed well defensively since Ancelotti was manager. The only times they have looked solid defensively since Di Matteo has arrived has been the Barcelona games and the Bayern game where they parked the bus.

G.K.

Which is precisely what England are going to do.

theoneeyedman

jaykay74 wrote: »

if you read the thread you'll see that was answered already. thanks.

Nothing on Rio refusing to play with terry though....

there has been a lot of speculation about this since before the origional squad was announced. Rio is careful not to get quoted directly on this but a lot of 'sources' appear to have been fed this line by rio and his entourage over the last few months, even though now he appears to be in denial about it and is trying to distance himself from the comments, a la his recent twitter attack on Matt dickenson from the London Times who is one of the people who has reported on it.

kryogen

ebbsy wrote: »

Ferdinand is in no position to talk about moral issues after missing that drugs test.

And missing one is the same as failing one.

Well done Mr. Hodgson.

Now thats good logic!

Well played sir

Paul Tergat

kryogen wrote: »

Now thats good logic!

Well played sir

I really do question whether some people actually have any intelligence at times

PhlegmyMoses

rarnes1 wrote: »

I think this point is being lost amongst everything.

It's a pretty poor point, tbf.

Ferdinand's behaviour is ill-advised, rather than disgraceful. Disgraceful is Joey Barton trying to punch players, Suarez racially abusing Evra, Keane deliberately stamping on Haaland, not making some comments that are better left unsaid, even if they are correct.

And this is hardly going to divide or disrupt the England team. The rest of the players couldn't give a ****. This is just fodder for the press.

niallo27

kryogen wrote: »

Now thats good logic!

Well played sir

Well in fairness they might not be the same but they must be treated the same.

kryogen

niallo27 wrote: »

Well in fairness they might not be the same but they must be treated the same.

Missing a test and failing a test are distinctly different things. Kinda mind boggling that anyone would try to say they are the same, regardless of club bias.

niallo27

kryogen wrote: »

Missing a test and failing a test are distinctly different things. Kinda mind boggling that anyone would try to say they are the same, regardless of club bias.

Yes but you agree they both have to be treated the same.

Paul Tergat

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but you agree they both have to be treated the same.

No of course not

kryogen

niallo27 wrote: »

Yes but you agree they both have to be treated the same.

Nope, they simply do not always have to be treated the same.

DB21

ricero wrote: »

anyway back to Ferdinand i think his behavior is disgraceful and proper disrupting to the team before the tournament.

Yeah, and getting arrested and charged with racial abuse isn't. :rolleyes:

niallo27

Really why not, you cant just go missing drug tests, i think the ban he got proved how importnat it was.

PhlegmyMoses

niallo27 wrote: »

Really why not, you cant just go missing drug tests, i think the ban he got proved how importnat it was.

And yet other players who missed them didn't get as severe a ban and players who actually failed drugs tests in Italy were getting 5 and 6 months. Ferdinand got banned for so long to appease the baying crowd. FIFA does not, last time I checked, adhere to WADA's anti-doping regulations so the two situations literally do not have to be treated the same, as I have outlined above.

Sgt Pepper 64

So a player misses out on the Euros - sob sob sob

The fact that his own manager said he wasnt up for it isnt enough apparently. There HAS to be some conspiracy theory - cant be just he is old and crap

niallo27

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

And yet other players who missed them didn't get as severe a ban and players who actually failed drugs tests in Italy were getting 5 and 6 months. Ferdinand got banned for so long to appease the baying crowd. FIFA does not, last time I checked, adhere to WADA's anti-doping regulations so the two situations literally do not have to be treated the same, as I have outlined above.

Yes 8 months was pretty severe in fairness, he was probaly made an example of.

Hulk Hands

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

So a player misses out on the Euros - sob sob sob

The fact that his own manager said he wasnt up for it isnt enough apparently. There HAS to be some conspiracy theory - cant be just he is old and crap

That whole post is laughable. So much wrong in so few lines

PhlegmyMoses

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

So a player misses out on the Euros - sob sob sob

The fact that his own manager said he wasnt up for it isnt enough apparently. There HAS to be some conspiracy theory - cant be just he is old and crap

He was better than Terry this year.

His injuries would be the reason why I think Hodgson was right not to bring him in the first place. That being said, when you are getting down to Martin Kelly as your next choice - no disrespect intended but he's not even first choice at Liverpool - you should probably think about calling up a defender who has so much experience and is on the back of a good season.

aindriu80

i think the saga is overblown... new manager time to move on with the older players.

MagicMarker

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

So a player misses out on the Euros - sob sob sob

The fact that his own manager said he wasnt up for it isnt enough apparently. There HAS to be some conspiracy theory - cant be just he is old and crap

It's not just because he's missing out on the euros, it's why he's missing out on the euros.

As for the crap comment, Ferdinand is clearly a far superior defender than Terry, always has been, always will be.

Sgt Pepper 64

MagicMarker wrote: »

It's not just because he's missing out on the euros, it's why he's missing out on the euros.

As for the crap comment, Ferdinand is clearly a far superior defender than Terry, always has been, always will be.

Youre entitled to your opinion but even if I wasnt a Chelsea supporter, I'd pick JT over him anyday of the week.

The why he is missing out because he cant be counted on as his OWN MANAGER has said

Why does have to be about anything else?

And why not pick so young lad? Ferdinand clearly isnt good enough and isnt fit enough

Hulk Hands

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

Youre entitled to your opinion but even if I wasnt a Chelsea supporter, I'd pick JT over him anyday of the week.

The why he is missing out because he cant be counted on as his OWN MANAGER has said

Why does have to be about anything else?

And why not pick so young lad? Ferdinand clearly isnt good enough and isnt fit enough

Will you stop that guff, he is obviously good enough. He is ahead of Phil Jones at United, who was on the original squad.

He has also played every game earmarked for him since Xmas, so he is clearly fit enough also.

Fergie only said he couldn't play a game every 4 days. That doesn't mean he couldn't play in plenty of the games out there.

Just be quiet now. I've a feeling you've come home with a few pints on ya and are going to be embarrassed by this in the morning.

MagicMarker

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

Youre entitled to your opinion but even if I wasnt a Chelsea supporter, I'd pick JT over him anyday of the week.

The why he is missing out because he cant be counted on as his OWN MANAGER has said

Why does have to be about anything else?

And why not pick so young lad? Ferdinand clearly isnt good enough and isnt fit enough

Ferdinand isn't good enough or fit enough for the England squad, but managed to be third in the number of minutes played in the premier league by any United player this past season. Sorry, that argument holds no water.

His manager said that he couldn't play a game every 4 days, who said he needs to? Although he HAS played that many games for Utd this season, no one says he has to be first choice, do you seriously expect us to believe Rio is not good enough or fit enough to be a back up CB after the season he's just had? That Phil Jones or Kelly should be ahead of him? Lest we forget that Rooney also can't play for the first two games, so once again your argument holds no water.

And why does it have to be about anything else? Well, because it's clear as day to anyone with a brain that Ferdinand is being punished because Terry is an "alleged" racist.

Sgt Pepper 64

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Will you stop that guff, he is obviously good enough. He is ahead of Phil Jones at United, who was on the original squad.

He has also played every game earmarked for him since Xmas, so he is clearly fit enough also.

Fergie only said he couldn't play a game every 4 days. That doesn't mean he couldn't play in plenty of the games out there.

Just be quiet now. I've a feeling you've come home with a few pints on ya and are going to be embarrassed by this in the morning.

Behave! Vidic and Jones will be your first choice CB next season
Its well known that JT is the better defender even at his peak. He's been in steady decline for a few years now

Why would Fergie bring it up unless he really thought that?
Do you know how the tournament works? You play every 4 days until the next stages. You dont start changing your back 4 around unless you have to - you want them to all play together possible.
I doubt England will even reach the stages where the matches are less frequent

G.K.

I think the United fans will be really hoping Jones doesn't start at CB next season.

Hulk Hands

G.K. wrote: »

I think the United fans will be really hoping Jones doesn't start at CB next season.

i think it will be Vidic and Rio for another year at least. Smalling is ahead of Jones for the moment. Jones gets far too much criticism for a 19 year old though. A player that age is always going to be raw, and it's a feature you can't have when playing in defence. He is an awesome prospect for his age

Hank Scorpio

It was fairly obvious Ferdinand wasn't called up the first time because of Terry, and the 2nd omission is just adding more salt to the wounds. You can understand Hodgson's thinking to be fair, he doesn't want a big situation to kick off which will damage morale and possibly create a split in the camp, Terry is accused of racially abusing Rio's brother. It's not right and not fair that Rio's been left out, however Rio was the easier one to drop because of his "injuries" and "lesser" media attention in the press. If Terry was dropped the scenario we see now which is pretty low key would have been much bigger.

Blatter

Ferdinand has played twice in 4 days a few times for United over the last few months, Fergie didn't say that he couldn't do it for England. It'd be a blatant lie if he did.

7th December - Starts v Basle

10th December - Starts v Wolves


4th January - Starts v Newcastle

8th January - Starts v Man City


11th March - Starts v West Brom

15th March - Starts v Bilbao


8th April - Starts v QPR

11th April (only 3 days later) - Starts v Wigan

niallo27

I would say Rio is a better defender than Terry but if i was an english fan, i would have Terry starting everytime before Rio if that makes sense. He just seems to want it more than Ferdinand.

Hulk Hands

niallo27 wrote: »

I would say Rio is a better defender than Terry but if i was an english fan, i would have Terry starting everytime before Rio if that makes sense. He just seems to want it more than Ferdinand.

I understand that point to be fair. Kinda like Richard Dunne becoming a colossus in the Irish shirt