Support NeoGAF

[psycho_snake]

Here's how I see it - England are crap, they are consistently crap and occasionally cover up the mess with flashes of individual brilliance cos hey - these guys are awesome individual players. England have one of the best squads in the world, they simply have a crappy team. However YOU are saying England are ok and nothing needs to be done - except well....er...Rooney plays well. or we find some amazing new striker. Or Owen comes back. you just revert to "I hope our individual stars perform today". I dont like that approach, it doesnt lead to good consistent football. It leads to scrappy games where we rely on a flash of brilliance or luck - which ends up being boring.

I agree on you with this. A team full of stars wont win anything. Real madrid have shown that a team full of "galacticos" doesnt make a team better. The thought of figo, beckham, zidane, ronaldo and raul playing on the same team sounds like an unbelievable team that no one can beat, but when you watch them play they look average. Each team needs to have 2 or 3 star players and the rest of the players need to be good players who get the job done. England are overloaded with starts, that when put together just cant perform. And lets not just look at Lampard and gerrard. Rooney has been very poor during international games. Ever since the euro there hasnt been a time when Ive been very impressed with rooneys performance.

If england are to become a better team, they need a manager weho isnt afraid to drop the big names and someone who can create a qwell balanced team. England would play a lopt better if there were a couple of big name players on whilst the rest of the team is made up of good players that arent superstars. Whats happening with england is that we have all our best players on the pitch and when they dont perform, we dont really have anyone on the bench that can turn a game around. However lets imagine that gerrard and hargreaves were starting and things were not going our way. We could bring lampard on to change things a bit because we all know that lampard is capable of making a big differnce. Dropping aome big players would allow us to have good subs to bring on and a more balaced team on the pitch. Gerrard, hargreaves, downing and lennon might not look like the strongest opposition you could field, but i bet that they would play well together because each of them have different roles. Not just that but teams seem to function better when there is one star, in this case its gerrard, surronded by good hardworking players. If things dont go well with them on the pitch, then you can bring on lampard or cole to change things around.

Carrick is an option, but he isnt a solution to englands problems. I dont see the difference that he's going to make. Anyone can replace lampard/ gerrard so that the other one has the freedom that they need. Carrick wont be any better than hargreaves or even nolan is at improving lampard or gerrards game.

 

[Mama Smurf]

I know some of you don't like stats, but...well, stats stay true whether you like them or not

There's a stats column I follow in one of the papers, and I find it fascinating. I can understand not liking them, it does afterall take a bit of the...romance out of the game, but I guess it takes a particular mind.

And they're very successful at what they do. To give some examples, they predicted Wigna would do well in their first Premiership season when everyone expected them to go right back down, and they were right. Same again this season with Reading. Also, every year they bet against the bookies on Premiership matches. Now the bookies take their odds seriously, they neither want to be losing money nor giving such rubbish odds that no one even bets. They want to get it right, so they really take it seriously when deciding who's more likely to win in a match.

Yet every year, these newspaper guys have made a healthy profit on their bets. They use their own stats, and whenever they think the bookies are 20% or more off in the bookies favour, they bet. Of course, sometimes they lose on individual matches, football is too low scoring a game to always win, but to beat the bookies every year overall is impressive.

Hopefully I've given them some credibility now. And these aren't just rubbish stats btw, they're not just looking at form or league positions or top goalscorers or whatever. They actually look at every incident in a game and weight them depending on how important those incidents are to teams winning.

I'm not sure I've explained that clearly, so I'll give an example. Let's take successful tackles in the middle third of the pitch vs shots on target. Now successful tackles are of course good for your team, so would earn points, but are nowhere near as important as shots on target, which will earn far more points.

They know this because, based on past stats from teams, they can run simulations of games again and again and again based on successful tackles in the middle third of the pitch and based on shots on target. They can then compare these two different sets of data to the actual results, and see that teams whop have more shots on target do indeed win more games than teams successful at tackling in the middle third of the field.

And they check all kinds of stats, more than you could think of. Shots on target from inside the box, shots on target from outside the box (not nearly as vaulable as those inside), shots off target, possession in all the seperate areas of the pitch successful passes in the all the different areas, unsuccessful passes, tackles won, tackles lost, free kicks conceded, penalties conceded, the distance a player runs during a game, number of corners, un/successful corners, un/successful crosses, assits, goal, saves from shots from different distances, crosses caught, crosses fumbled, the quality of the opposition, whether it's home or away. They even weight things using some clever statistical method to eliminate unfair advantages to players...for example, Rooney's surrounded by great players whilst Bent is not, it's not fair to just compare the two on that level, so they have some way of fixing that (I wish I knew what it was, but they're not going to reveal their statistical models).

Anyway, every concievable action of a player on a pitch is collected and given a points value, based on how valuable that action is to a team winning. And directly so, if shots in the box are 10% more likely to win a game than shots from outside a box, it gets 10% more points.

You may wonder where I'm going with this, apart from it just being interesting if you have a mind like me. Well, yesterday there was a column on England, they like to keep their stats relevant. There are various points, a copule of which are very relevant here. One was that population size amongst footballing countries is a STRONG indicator of whether they'll win international matches. Not necessarily whether they'll win tournaments, just their average results over time. Obviously I'm talking about countries where football is a big thing, China's population is huge but football isn't as big there as it is in Brazil...though it might be someday so everyone watch out. Anyway, England are actually performing better than they should be based on that, and going out of tournaments at quarter-finals is a reasonable expectation.

My main thing I wanted to point out though is this...they wanted to know if the players getting most criticism are those who deserve it or not. So they checked, and guess what? One player stands head and shoulders above the rest in what he brings to the team, in terms of what's needed to win games. Frank Lampard, 53% better than the next best English player. 53%! Oh and Stewart Downing actually loses points compared to the average player...not the average England player, where standards would be higher, the average Premiership player. Just thought that would be an interesting sidenote.

Plus I can feel smug that my analysis of Lampard and Downing is backed up by the stats, though I was just doing it off observations.

 

[hadareud]

which paper is it Mama? I need help with my mad betting skillz.

 

[hadareud]

I didnt mean to blame arsenals poor performance on hleb shinobi, it was just a joke. I just dont like him at all. The wholw team played poorly, hleb played no worse than anyone else.

As arsenal fans dont you guys feel frustrated when watching hleb. He's got the potential to be great. If you saw the tuff he did at his old club you would be amazed; he was amazing. But when youw atch him now he's poor. His dribbling is good, but his passing and his shooting isnt good enough.

yeah, and it's nothing new either. He'll have to step it up next year, I would really like him to. I actually like him.

Here's what I wrote after watching Arsenal - Middlesbrough at the beginning of the season:

-Hleb. I do like Hleb. But don't put me in the same room with him and a kitchen knife. It's so frustrating to watch him at times - you can see that he is a quality player, but he is so incredibly unconcentrated. Please get him a mental coach. He also completely lacks any kind of self confidence. Shoot for ****s sake. He was very unlucky first half when he did shoot for once though, but that was an incredible save by Schwarzer.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4262200&postcount=1503

 

[Mama Smurf]

It's The Times.

I'm heading for a profit this week if Tottenham hold onto their lead against Reading. Really should have put the game to bed by now, have had enough chances.

 

[hadareud]

Cheers. I need Spurs to win and Villa to draw not to lose any money. A bad weekend all around for me.

 

[Mama Smurf]

Spurs play some attractive football, but sure do waste a lot of chances.

Bolton v Sheff Utd 1.70, 62%, £7.00 WIN
Man Utd v Blackburn 1.36, 63%, £3.60 WIN
Newcastle v Man City 2.10, 61%, £11.00 LOSE
Watford v Chelsea 1.37, 63%, £3.70 WIN
Tottenham v Reading 1.87, 56%, £8.70 WIN

£50 outlay, possible profit £34, possible return £84

Outcome: £13 profit, £63 return

If I'd been actually betting, I'd still be down overall thanks to last week, but if I'd been betting at 60%+ instead, I'd have made a profit both weeks.

 

[Stevie Gerrard]

Brilliant commentary on yesterday's game:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFbHvBGdoiU&mode=related&search=

listen for the backing vocals from george the stadium announcer on the second

 

[kaizoku]

Mama you must be the only guy left who sounds pleased with the England perrformances of the past few years.

All you do is take my argument and twist it round so that I'm somehow wrong which is not the best way to approach an argument - if I say Carrick brings a different flavour to a game than Hargreaves - its stupid to say:

Hargreaves is more box to box for his club, he has to hold more for England. Of course the play differently, they're different people, but at the heart of it they both play the holding role.

which is meaningless. you're doing it constantly and it renders your point worthless. That only goes to show your lack of understanding of the game and adds nothing to the debate except a CONTRADICTION. Stop trying to disagree with me for the sake of proving me wrong - because you cannot prove me wrong on these kind of things. I mean seriously this is irritating me now, thats like saying Pirlo and Gattuso are the same kind of players. which is ludicrous.

Of course I am aware that Rooney is playing shit, I would love if England would give him a rest ffs. I hate when he plays for England, is run into the ground and then handed back to us after the press have mauled him. I feel much better when he's in the safety of Man Utd's structure. But who the hell do you replace him with? England are bare bones up front as it is - so much so Nugent got a game! But I'm not here to point the finger unlike you! I'm not here to criticise or hate, I'm here to consider improvements!! What the hell are you here for? To disagree with me and blame Rooney from the looks of it.

Maybe you need to stop and wonder why Rooney isn't performing for England, Why Scholes didn't perform for England before his retirement, why all these boos are happening and why the team struggles against bloody Andorra, Israel and all these other no-mark teams.

you have no concept of what it means to control a game and dictate its rhythm and pace? do you not have any concept of tactics and the benefits of a deep lying playmaker? the England midfield is a shambles because there is no direction or composure, every time one of them gets the ball he rushes and panics.

We saw vs Andorra that a midfield of Lennon - Gerrard - Hargreaves - Downing is as appalling and boring as any. If you think that was a satisfactory performance you clearly dont know what a genuinely good team looks like. It was disjointed, lucky and stale. and that was with a team so so poor they couldnt even capitalise on any of your mistakes and resorted to rolling around on the floor.

I can't recall the last time I saw Gerrard or Lampard pass it around the pitch and have a nice interplay between players as they probe and find a weak spot. All they do when they get the ball is attempt a dribble, shot, long pass or short pass.

Its funny that you say Carrick has awesome movement at Utd and thats why he plays well - so what happens when he is with England? Lampard, Gerrard, Lennon and Downing don't move? Who's fault is that then?

Aren't you just agreeing with me? The England team does not play as a team which is why the movement is bad and why the options are so limited.

Against Andorra the only one who looked like he knows how to play as a team was Hargreaves, he did well tidying up and spreading play, however everytime he did so the receiver would end up playing crap football again. If it was Hargreaves and Carrick it would provide a great base of two good ball playing holding players to give the others room to be creative.

If you dont agree - fine. No problem, like I said, the only way my theory will be proved right or wrong is it its tested out.

As for your formation analysis, I DID say that Carrick is shoe horned in whenever Gerrard and Lampard are still playing at the same time, they dont play as a team so it reduces his impact. He has never played without some kind of strange formation like 4-3-3 or trying to do a cameo behind the superstar combo of gerrard and lampard.

No one can perform well under those conditions. As I said in my post. Despite the greatness of Lampard, much of England's success in reaching the world cup and progressing through the group was down to Beckham's delivery, which shows just how uninspired England are overall. Its no coincidence they struggle now his delivery has been taken out and they have no gameplan whatsoever except to go out and run around for abit and see what happens.

 

[Mama Smurf]

Mama you must be the only guy left who sounds pleased with the England perrformances of the past few years.

England's performances over the last few years are pretty much the same standard of England performances since we won the World Cup. So, happy? Sometimes, sometimes not. Satisfied that we're generally playing at a level we should be would be more accurate, sometimes beyond that, sometimes below.

All you do is take my argument and twist it round so that I'm somehow wrong which is not the best way to approach an argument

I haven't twisted anything, I'm sorry if I'm "somehow" showing you're wrong repeatedly.

- if I say Carrick brings a different flavour to a game than Hargreaves - its stupid to say:

"Hargreaves is more box to box for his club, he has to hold more for England. Of course the play differently, they're different people, but at the heart of it they both play the holding role."

which is meaningless. you're doing it constantly and it renders your point worthless. That only goes to show your lack of understanding of the game and adds nothing to the debate except a CONTRADICTION. Stop trying to disagree with me for the sake of proving me wrong - because you cannot prove me wrong on these kind of things. I mean seriously this is irritating me now, thats like saying Pirlo and Gattuso are the same kind of players. which is ludicrous.

That is in response to you saying he should be playing instead of Lamaprd/Gerrard, rather than Hargreaves. It is NOT me saying that Hargreaves and Carrick play the same. They play the same position on the pitch, with a different style. How is me saying "of course they play differently" the same as saying Pirlo and Gattuso are the same players?

I don't disagree with anyone for the sake of proving them wrong, except my ex-girlfriend. Please don't think yourself so important to me, I'd disagree with anyone in this thread if they were saying what you were.

Of course I am aware that Rooney is playing shit, I would love if England would give him a rest ffs. I hate when he plays for England, is run into the ground and then handed back to us after the press have mauled him. I feel much better when he's in the safety of Man Utd's structure. But who the hell do you replace him with? England are bare bones up front as it is - so much so Nugent got a game!

Nugent did better than Rooney when he came on. As for who to replace him with, Owen and Coruch should be back for the next games, so them. Defoe if one of those two isn't fit. Or, if Rooney's back on form, he can keep going.

But I'm not here to point the finger unlike you! I'm not here to criticise or hate, I'm here to consider improvements!! What the hell are you here for? To disagree with me and blame Rooney from the looks of it.

Oh good, I'm glad to see this from the last post wasn't overlooked:

"
No, I'm saying the last two perfomances have been good except the finishing and mocement of the forwards. Rooney, Johnson, Defoe (but less Defoe, who did better when he came on)...they're the main guys who are meant to finish all those chances, and they haven't been. Previous games have been crap.

I also say we need to get some of our first teamers back, because up front and on the left wing we're severely lacking if our main guys aren't there. In other words, Owen and Joe Cole...perhaps even Crouch, as he has a knack for putting the ball int he back of hte net despite his all round play.

Finally I say that, even when both Gerrard and Lampard are fit, only one of them should be playing and that one should be playing in central midfield, not on the wing.

And from that, you concluded that I said England are ok and that nothing needs to be done except Rooney needs to play better. That's some good reading comprehension."

Maybe you need to stop and wonder why Rooney isn't performing for England, Why Scholes didn't perform for England before his retirement, why all these boos are happening and why the team struggles against bloody Andorra, Israel and all these other no-mark teams.

I do wonder some of these things, and never come up with answer of Carrick. Because I've seen Carrick play for England, and nothing changes. Scholes wasn't performing at his best for United when he wasn't for England either. The boos are because of too high expectations and...getting tired of saying this...I thought we played well against Andorra and Israel.

you have no concept of what it means to control a game and dictate its rhythm and pace? do you not have any concept of tactics and the benefits of a deep lying playmaker? the England midfield is a shambles because there is no direction or composure, every time one of them gets the ball he rushes and panics.

The England midfield is providing the strikers with a crapload of ahcnes that they're missing. If Carrick replaced Gerrard/Lampard, he wouldn't have nearly the time he does at United. With no Scholes/Gerrard/Lampard ahead of him, there's no reason the opposition can't swarm Carrick with no one else to take care of, not to mention one less person to pass the ball to.

We saw vs Andorra that a midfield of Lennon - Gerrard - Hargreaves - Downing is as appalling and boring as any.

I hate Downing, liked the others, created lots of chances.

If you think that was a satisfactory performance you clearly dont know what a genuinely good team looks like. It was disjointed, lucky and stale. and that was with a team so so poor they couldnt even capitalise on any of your mistakes and resorted to rolling around on the floor.

It was unlucky not to win by 6 or 7.

I can't recall the last time I saw Gerrard or Lampard pass it around the pitch and have a nice interplay between players as they probe and find a weak spot. All they do when they get the ball is attempt a dribble, shot, long pass or short pass.

Funny, I don't remember any neta interplay with Carrick for England either.

Its funny that you say Carrick has awesome movement at Utd and thats why he plays well - so what happens when he is with England? Lampard, Gerrard, Lennon and Downing don't move? Who's fault is that then?

That's my point...it is the players around him's fault 'cos they don't move well enough. They're not going to magically start moving well because Carrick is playing, so he's not going to ahve the same opportunities to pass, not to mention ebing crowded out by the opposition freed up by no attacking midfielder.

Aren't you just agreeing with me?

Only if you're saying Carrick can't make a difference because the players at England won't move like the United players do.

The England team does not play as a team which is why the movement is bad and why the options are so limited.

The movement is bad because they hardly ever get to play together and can't work on it.

Against Andorra the only one who looked like he knows how to play as a team was Hargreaves, he did well tidying up and spreading play, however everytime he did so the receiver would end up playing crap football again. If it was Hargreaves and Carrick it would provide a great base of two good ball playing holding players to give the others room to be creative.

Less room to be creative with the opposition being able to close on them without the worry of a Scholes/Lampard/Gerrard behind them.

If you dont agree - fine.

This is pretty contradictory when you keep complaining that I'm just disagreeing with you for the sake of it.

No problem, like I said, the only way my theory will be proved right or wrong is it its tested out.

I wish they would test it out so you can see Carrick won't make the difference.

As for your formation analysis, I DID say that Carrick is shoe horned in whenever Gerrard and Lampard are still playing at the same time, they dont play as a team so it reduces his impact.

If you're being put in your ideal position, you're not being shoehorned in. "They don't play as a team"...I don't even know how to argue that, I think think they do, you don't. There are really no facts or evidence to indicate who's a team player or not, you just ahve to choose for yourself.

He has never played without some kind of strange formation like 4-3-3 or trying to do a cameo behind the superstar combo of gerrard and lampard.

Yes he has.

No one can perform well under those conditions. As I said in my post. Despite the greatness of Lampard, much of England's success in reaching the world cup and progressing through the group was down to Beckham's delivery, which shows just how uninspired England are overall. Its no coincidence they struggle now his delivery has been taken out and they have no gameplan whatsoever except to go out and run around for abit and see what happens.

Good performances against Israel and Andorra though. Shame about the finishing.

EDIT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ub842qIfVZQ

Rio :lol

 

[Stevie Gerrard]

Carrick's been rubbish when he's played for england, against macedonia he either passed it 5 yards to the opposition or lumped garryowens up to the edge of the box. Nowt to do with the players around him

 

[kaizoku]

Mama, I am fine about you not agreeing with me, the point is you're trying to shoot my argument down with irrelevent points rather than genuine analysis and I am defending my stance and my belief.

I have not at any point taken shots at your opinion, because as far as I'm aware you haven't even expressed one except "Carrick isn't the solution" and "we need a better striker" and "England aren't doing so bad at all". Which aren't really worth debating, thats your opinion. All you do is repeat over and over "Carrick hasn't performed for England even though he has loadsof chances"- which is already a flawed sentence. 1st- You just give up on him then? 2nd - who HAS performed for England lately? Not many players. 3rd - everytime he has played I have looked at the situation and thought "great another crap line up which won't work". Always some new tweak or someone out of position. When Carrick plays for Utd he gives and he gets back, players play around him. When he plays for England, people get the ball off him then turn their back on him and revert to mindless "quick everyone run towards the goal!" That is football analysis put into simple terms and its why England do not play as a team.

Why you feel the need to somehow prove me wrong I dont know - you CANNOT prove me wrong on this issue. The only person who can is Mclaren by playing him some more. If I say "Carrick can bring this and this to the table" why do you turn around and say "no he cant".....? Why not?

Hardly a worthwhile analysis of the beautiful game. I give up on you, you're convinced you've proved me wrong repeatedly?

WHERE??

 

[Shinobi]

As arsenal fans dont you guys feel frustrated when watching hleb. He's got the potential to be great. If you saw the tuff he did at his old club you would be amazed; he was amazing. But when youw atch him now he's poor. His dribbling is good, but his passing and his shooting isnt good enough.

I think his play is more a symptom of our problems, rather than the cause. We've been guilty of overpassing the last few years, but now it's just gotten ridiculous. We need a couple of midfielders that can not only bang it in from 25 yards out when the opportunity presents itself, but has enough will to do it. Hleb has never struck me as that sort of player though, so it doesn't bother me that he doesn't take shots. It does bother me when he seems to run into trouble instead of laying it off or chipping it into the box, so in that sense I'd rather see him shoot because anything can happen. Then again we rarely make enough runs into the penalty area as well to take advantage of crosses, lobs or rebounds, so that's another issue that needs addressing.

Cheers. I need Spurs to win and Villa to draw not to lose any money. A bad weekend all around for me.

You know it's a bad weekend when a Gooner needs a Spurs win to salvage it...

As far as England goes, I do agree that England needs some sort of change (though you can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit)...but acting like Carrick is the man that can lead them to the promised land is one of the dumbest things I've ever read in my life. Even Tottenham fans wouldn't have said that sort of shit when they had him, and they're among the most deluded fans in the country.

BTW kaizoku, in case you haven't noticed, Rooney isn't doing shit for United either. And he's got England's saviour AND the best player in the world to help him along. So what do you blame that on, bad pitches? Bad start times? Nike? The Sky Sports camera lights being turned on too brightly? Get real.

 

[Mama Smurf]

Mama, I am fine about you not agreeing with me, the point is you're trying to shoot my argument down with irrelevent points rather than genuine analysis and I am defending my stance and my belief.

I think I'm giving very good points and analysis.

I have not at any point taken shots at your opinion

Actually you have. You've repeatedly told me that if I think so and so then I can't be very good at analyzing football, that I must be getting my opinions from the media (which doesn't even make any sense when I'm against the media on this one) or videogames/

because as far as I'm aware you haven't even expressed one except "Carrick isn't the solution" and "we need a better striker" and "England aren't doing so bad at all". Which aren't really worth debating, thats your opinion.

And what have you expressed? That Carrick is the solution and will make England play like a team? At least I have examples of Carrick making no difference when he's played, unlike Hargreaves, Gerrard and Lampard, and stats and numerous moments when England players were presetned with superb goalscoring opportunities by the midfield and squandered them to back me up.

All you do is repeat over and over "Carrick hasn't performed for England even though he has loadsof chances"- which is already a flawed sentence. 1st- You just give up on him then?

It's not about giving up on Carrick, it's about sticking with the players who have and are performing for England. I don't evem mind Carrick playing, if it's for Hargreaves, I just see no reason to think that'll improve England, but plenty to think it won't. There are players out there who haven't had chances who could certainly come into things and I wouldn't mind, but Carrick has.

2nd - who HAS performed for England lately? Not many players.

The defence has been pretty strong in most games, but in the last couple of games I'd say Hargreaves, Lampard, Gerrard and Defoe have stood out, going forwards. Not top of their game perhaps, but a good standard.

3rd - everytime he has played I have looked at the situation and thought "great another crap line up which won't work". Always some new tweak or someone out of position.

And there always will be, welcome to international football.

When Carrick plays for Utd he gives and he gets back, players play around him. When he plays for England, people get the ball off him then turn their back on him and revert to mindless "quick everyone run towards the goal!" That is football analysis put into simple terms and its why England do not play as a team.

So why would Carrick playing for England change that? You're just arguing my point now, that it's the players around Carrick at United that make him so strong there, and that the players around him at England aren't helping. Nor will they, they're the best players we have but don't have the time together to get their movement going. It's possible in 5 years time that we'll have the players to make Carrick effective for England, but as you've just said yourself, he doesn't work with England because of the players around him.

Why you feel the need to somehow prove me wrong I dont know

I'm here to argue my point, you're here to argue your point. What's the difference? I'm not giving up and you're not giving up...what's the difference?

you CANNOT prove me wrong on this issue.

Apparently not, no matter how much evidence I provide. You've given me zero evidence that he could do it for England, just that you think he might if he got more chances. I've given you the evidence of his past performances, when he's played in his favoured position with a largely (and that's all you'll ever get at international level) first team around him and hasn't changed anything.

The only person who can is Mclaren by playing him some more. If I say "Carrick can bring this and this to the table" why do you turn around and say "no he cant".....? Why not?

Because he hasn't before. Why can he? It's fun to be a hypocrit, isn't it?

Hardly a worthwhile analysis of the beautiful game. I give up on you, you're convinced you've proved me wrong repeatedly?

WHERE??

Where I've shown how valuable Lampard is to England, where I've shown how many great chances we've created in the last couple of games without Carrick, where I've shown you that Carrick wouldn't have the room if he was playing with Hargreaves that he does at United, where I've shown that the movement around him wouldn't be to his advantage (and you've even agreed on that one, in advertantly thinking it was somehow in favour of Carrick's inclusion), where I've shown you that Carrick has had numerous full games with the best teams we can put out and many close together and England haven't played any better for his inclusion.

So not much then.

 

[Mama Smurf]

I just want to expand on the first team thing. It's ridiculous to think a player can only be judged when surrounded by the entire, absolutely ideal first team. How often do you get to play your absolute first team? Even in the league it's incredibly lucky if you can, and there are way more fixtures for it to potentially happen there. At international level, you have to be incredibly lucky to have everyone available, thanks to the fewer fixtures.

United don't have their first team out there, Saha and Evra are out and so is Vidic now. Chelsea don't, Robben, Joe Cole and Essien aren't available. Arsenal don't, Henry and Van Persie are missing. Liverpool don't, Kewell and Luis Garcia have been missing forever. Blackburn don't, Reid, Savage and Ooijer are long term injuries. I could probably go through every team in the Premiership and I wouldn't find an available first team. You have to impress with the players out there, there's almost never any other choice, and unless you're playing with more second string players than first choice, there's no excuse not to perform with those you're with.

 

[psycho_snake]

I think his play is more a symptom of our problems, rather than the cause. We've been guilty of overpassing the last few years, but now it's just gotten ridiculous. We need a couple of midfielders that can not only bang it in from 25 yards out when the opportunity presents itself, but has enough will to do it. Hleb has never struck me as that sort of player though, so it doesn't bother me that he doesn't take shots. It does bother me when he seems to run into trouble instead of laying it off or chipping it into the box, so in that sense I'd rather see him shoot because anything can happen. Then again we rarely make enough runs into the penalty area as well to take advantage of crosses, lobs or rebounds, so that's another issue that needs addressing.

Arsenal just need to improve their finishing, lack of shooting their aerial ability. The passing games can work well, but everyopne is more aware opf what arsenal can do, so there are times when you'll play a team that will put every man in their own half and get their midfield to play rough because they know that arsenal will rip them apart if they allow them to play their passing game. Its not negative tactics, its what needs to be done to get something out of the game.

When the opposition plays like that, you've got to have players that are willing to shoot from long distances. I actually thought this problem would be solved when rosicky came to the club. He's proved that he can do it, he's scored some amazing goals this season, but he doesnt do it enough. Rosicky can shoot and he's the perfect player to have on the pitch when the oppositions defence is too difficult to break down. Aerial ability needs to improve too. Arsenal get so many cornerts and barely score from them, whilsty their opposition get a couple of corners and score from atleast one. Im not sure if its tactics or the players, but arsenal dont pose a big threat from set pieces.

As much as arsenal piss me off at times, I just feel that they've nearly got a team thats good enough to be the best in the world. Toure and Gallas are an immense partnership. Cesc is becoming one of the best midfielders at such a young age. Van Persie looks like he could be come the next bergkamp. Walcott has got the potential. I reckon all arsenal need is a bit more experience in the side. United have shown just how important experience is. Although ronaldo has been our main man this season, giigs and scholes have managed to dig us out of difficult situations. With the experiewnce they've got, they know how rto deal with every type of situation. They can help the younger players because they were in that position once. Experience can make a big difference. Against Liverpool you desperately needed a vieira type player. The midfield that was playing were good and they've got the potential to become the best in the world, but it had no chance against Liverpools midfield.

 

[Yazan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lhaIq9W_cI

Wonderful goal by Quagliarella.

 

[hadareud]

that was quite alright. wow.

this sums up Arsenals performance quite well (minus the Hleb out wishes of the author):
http://arseblog.com/WP/2007/04/01/liverpool-make-arsenal-march-fools-at-anfield/

 

[Mama Smurf]

Newcastle want to improve their ground to at least a 60,000 capacity and plan to spend £300m.

Their current ground is 52,000.

The entire Emirates Stadium cost £390m.

£300m for 8000 seats.

The mind boggles.

Spoiler

Alright, so I'm not being completely honest, there are also hotels and apartments and a conference centre included in that price, but it still seems an awful lot of money.

 

[Mama Smurf]

As for Arsenal, there do seem to be quite a few areas to work on. One definite one though is defending set pieces, which is just a mess. I'm not sure if it's the fault of the devensive coach or if the team just isn't tall enough, but something needs to be done.

You do have quite short centre backs...for centre backs. If you look at the top 4:

Man Utd:

Ferdinand 6' 2
Vidic 6' 2

Chelsea:

Terry 6' 2
Carvalho 6' 0

Liverpool:

Agger 6' 3
Carragher 6' 1

Arsenal:

Toure 6' 0
Gallas 5' 11

So you're losing between 3 and 5 inches of height back there on your rivals, no wonder Crouch was such a handful.

Kind of lends more strength to my Woodgate (6' 2) partnering Toure at the back with Gallas at right back theory.

 

[hadareud]

Interesting point. I'm not sure though that it was so much down to height on saturday though, difficult to say, since we were shit all around. Also, let's not forget that Crouch isn't usually the best header of the ball, if he was I don't think any defence would be able to contain him.

I'd like Woodgate though.

 

[Lakitu]

Newcastle want to improve their ground to at least a 60,000 capacity and plan to spend £300m.

Their current ground is 52,000.

The entire Emirates Stadium cost £390m.

£300m for 8000 seats.

The mind boggles.

Spoiler

Alright, so I'm not being completely honest, there are also hotels and apartments and a conference centre included in that price, but it still seems an awful lot of money.

They're spending 300m on that and not improving their squad with that kind of money? Wow.

 

[hadareud]

the Euro in Austria

Spoiler

and Switzerland

is sold out already. They took ticket requests during March, and had over 10 million applications. I applied for 2 Austrian tournament ticket too, not that we'll make it past the group stages.

If I get them I think I'll go to one or two games and sell the rest of the tickets for an obscene amount of money. I'm quite the businessman ya know.

 

[Mama Smurf]

Well something has to fund your gambling habit.

 

[hadareud]

:lol

that was too easy.

 

[Shinobi]

Well something has to fund your gambling habit.

:lol

 

[MrPing1000]

Newcastle want to improve their ground to at least a 60,000 capacity and plan to spend £300m.

Their current ground is 52,000.

The entire Emirates Stadium cost £390m.

£300m for 8000 seats.

The mind boggles.

Spoiler

Alright, so I'm not being completely honest, there are also hotels and apartments and a conference centre included in that price, but it still seems an awful lot of money.

It's an investment, will take years to see any of it coming back into the club but it should happen eventually. Georgies love their footy so they'll have little trouble filling it anyhoo. Saint James Park is awesome.

 

[hadareud]

Laugh all you want, I will have the last laugh in my greek villa that was entirely financed by my betting skills

Spoiler

or the gutter

.

Anyway, here's what Arseblogger has to say about Arsenal's season and the potential of the team:

Is this a squad that can win the title? No. This is a squad which is capable of 4th place, 3rd at a push and so, while compared to previous seasons we have underperformed, the reality is we’re doing pretty much as well as we can in terms of league position based on the players that we have.

I don't really agree that we are doing as well as can be expected. I do think this team had the potential to challenge for the title. Unfortunately it was just the potential, because very few players have actually performed up to theirs consistently. I would say the only ones that have are Toure, Lehmann, Hoyte, Gilberto and Fabregas until recently.

As Arseblogger rightly implies you can't expect 18 or 19 year olds to perform consistently over a whole season. However, the players that didn't perform include more experienced ones. I think you can expect players like Henry, Baptista, Rosicky, Hleb, Ljungberg, Gallas etc. to be consistent, if they are injury free. None of these players were.

Now if we look at it from a quality perspective, I think the only player I now feel safe saying doesn't have what it takes is Baptista (sadly, because I would have liked him to be a success) and maybe Hleb, although I still think he should get another season to prove himself.

Would the season have turned out differently if we would have been largely injury free, like the other top clubs? I have no doubt that it would have. While I think Man Utd still would probably win the title I think Arsenal would still be in the race, at least within breathing distance of Chelsea, quite possibly ahead of them.

Basically, I very much think the team has more quality than just "getting 3rd place at a push". btw, Arsenal still have a game in hand and are only 2 points behind Liverpool, I think 3rd is still very much up for the taking for us.

Looking back, I haven't changed my opinion about this squad from the start of the season. It did take me a few days to get over that performance at Anfield though, since it was the most disappointing Arsenal game I have seen in quite a few years.

 

[Cornballer]

Yeah, we should put Arseblogger on suicide watch or something - the last two columns were pretty depressing. :lol The future does look bright, but I really hope we don't have a repeat of this season next year - fewer injury problems, some leadership from the senior players, and another year of maturity for the youngsters would help a lot.

 

[ElyrionX]

Yes, Arsenal has a really young squad with some players showing great potential. However, the key to turning the young squad into a great team will be heavily dependent on how Wenger manages and grooms them. Whether he can turn them into a great squad capable of winning championships remains to be seen.

Remember back when Ferguson sold Kanchelski, Hughes and Ince and decide to go all out with the youth team plus a few veterans (Cantona, Pallister, Bruce, Irwin, Schmeichel)? That is how a team comprising mainly of youths went on to dominate the English game and that is something that perhaps Wenger can look at and learn from. I guess it helped that most of the players had gone through the youth academy in Manchester together and hence had a great sense of team spirit by the time they hit the senior squad.

 

[bud]

prediction time guise!

bolded to go to the semi-finals imo:


psv - liverpool
ac milan - bayern munchen
chelsea - valencia (sheva will hopefully come through or else i don't care)
as roma - man united

 

[ElyrionX]

prediction time guise!

bolded to go to the semi-finals imo:


psv - liverpool
ac milan - bayern munchen
chelsea - valencia (sheva will hopefully come through or else i don't care)
as roma - man united

I'm sensing a huge English bias here.

 

[Falch]

PSV - liverpool
ac milan - bayern munchen
chelsea - valencia
as roma - man united

Over the course of two legs, ofcourse.

Semi-final:

PSV - Chelsea
Man United - Bayern Munich

Final:
PSV - Man United

PSV beating Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea and Man United to win the CL. :lol

 

[hadareud]

excellent, just found out that arsenal.com is streaming the fa youth cup semi final against manyoo (for members). Great quality stream too.

About to start in 15 minutes. Will we win a title after all?

 

[Mama Smurf]

I think you definitely will.

Your women's team is beyond dominant.

 

[Blablurn]

Rensing is going to replace Kahn tomorrow! He will do his best! Don't underestimate him, Milan .

 

[Juno]

Quite suprised so many are putting Roma ahead of Man U. The team who have been top of arguably the strongest league in the world (EPL) since October last year against the team second in Serie A 20 points behind the leaders (and it would be 4th not for Lazio and Milan's point reductions).

Intersting...

 

[Osorio]

psv - liverpool
ac milan - bayern munchen
chelsea - valencia
as roma - man united


In MLS news, Chicago is the third team to use the designated player rule to get Cuauhtemoc Blanco from Club America.

Mexican soccer legend Cuauhtemoc Blanco will put pen to paper Tuesday on a deal with the Chicago Fire, the club has announced.

The Fire said Blanco will be in Chicago on Monday and Tuesday for a pair of events. He'll be at Toyota Park in Bridgeview, Ill., Monday at 7 p.m. CT to meet fans and sign autographs, and on Tuesday, he'll sign his contract with the Men in Red during the club's media luncheon at the Hilton Chicago at 10 a.m. CT.

Like David Beckham, who agreed to a five-year deal with the Los Angeles Galaxy in January, Blanco won't join his new club until the summer. His contract with his current team, Mexican powerhouse Club America, expires June 30, and Blanco will be eligible to join the Fire immediately thereafter.

Blanco will count as the Fire's designated player, meaning the first $400,000 of his contract will be paid by the league and its investors. The remainder will be paid for by the team and its investor-operator, AEG.

The 34-year-old is the third player to be signed under the designated player rule after Beckham and Claudio Reyna of the New York Red Bulls.

Blanco comes to the Fire after building his legend with the Mexican national team and with numerous teams in the Mexican Primera Division, most notably Club America. Blanco began his career with the Aguilas in 1990 at age 17 and in four separate stints with the club, he's scored 124 goals in 312 games. He has also played for Necaxa and Veracruz in Mexico and Real Valladolid in Spain.

For the Mexican national team, Blanco has made 95 appearances and scored 25 goals. Blanco appeared in the 1998 and 2002 World Cups for El Tricolor, but his brightest moment on the international stage was the 1999 FIFA Confederations Cup, when he scored a tournament-record nine goals to lead Mexico to the title.

I feel that this deal might have more to do with generating revenue than about making the team better. At least my team doesn't have to put up with him.

 

[Cornballer]

In MLS news, Chicago is the third team to use the designated player rule to get Cuauhtemoc Blanco from Club America.

I feel that this deal might have more to do with generating revenue than about making the team better. At least my team doesn't have to put up with him.

I saw that this morning. I think it's a terrible idea - I think he's a bit past it and he's always had an attitude problem from what I remember.

 

[Osorio]

I saw that this morning. I think it's a terrible idea - I think he's a bit past it and he's always had an attitude problem from what I remember.

Which is why I think Guppy got him so that the Mexican community comes to Toyota Park and not because he wants to win a title.

Also, Garber and Gazidis announced some initiatives for the league that they're calling Game First.

GAME FIRST INTIATIVES

Players

* MLS clubs have more resources than ever to acquire players. This off season has already witnessed a significant influx talent. The new resources include:
o Increased options with allocation money
o Designated Player Rule
o Re-investment of transfer fees (MLS clubs now receive two-thirds of the fees earned when one of their players is transferred. That money can be used in a number of ways to improve the team's on-field product.)
* Some of the players who have signed to play for MLS clubs recently are:
o David Beckham (Los Angeles Galaxy)
o Jim Brennan (Toronto FC)
o Roberto Brown (Colorado Rapids)
o Conor Casey (Toronto FC)
o Luciano Emilio (D.C. United)
o Fred (D.C. United)
o Maykel Galindo (Chivas USA)
o Yherland MacDonald, (Colorado Rapids)
o Claudio Reyna (New York Red Bulls)
o Carl Robinson (Toronto FC)
o Robbie Rogers (Columbus)
o Luis Tejada (Real Salt Lake)
o Juan Carlos Toja (FC Dallas)
o Andy Welsh (Toronto FC)

More signings are expected prior to the April 15 transfer deadline.

# MLS has hired a full-time consultant based in South America to assist MLS teams in scouting and acquiring players from that talent-laden region.
# MLS has started a worldwide player database and video library for teams to use as a scouting resource.
# The Youth Development program allows for teams that invest in player development to reap competitive rewards for their efforts. Players who are part of an MLS club's Youth Development program for at least 24 months become eligible to sign directly with that team instead of entering the MLS SuperDraft.

Access

* MLS will utilize a digital system that tracks and analyzes the technical aspects of soccer. This will provide coaches, players, and officials with valuable training and evaluation tool, help teams prepare for their opponents and allow for comparisons of our League games versus others around the world.
* MLS is working with broadcasters to provide better television coverage of games than ever before. Every MLS game will be available via at least one of the following platforms: our national broadcast partners, the Direct Kick cable/satellite package, or MLSnet.com. Game broadcast enhancements include:
o Increased access to national broadcast partners for locker room and sideline interviews that do not interfere with the game.
More camera angles of the action; better and more timely replays.

Game Presentation

* MLS has implemented certain standards for pre-game presentations that will occur at all MLS games.
o Teams will line up alongside each other in the tunnel prior to emerging for kickoff.
o As teams enter the field, led by the referees (FIFA style), a new MLS anthem will be played.
* A new MLS anthem and signature sound was recorded last month by a full orchestra in Prague, Czech Republic, under the direction of an American conductor. More details on this piece of music will be revealed on April 6 on MLSnet.com.
* In-stadium commercial PA announcements during play will be significantly reduced.
* MLS has established guidelines for field maintenance, including:
o The length of the grass cut and optimal watering schedules prior to the match
o The pattern of directional cuts, so as to assist fans and referees better view offside decisions

Competition Format

# The four MLS teams with the best regular season records in 2007 will qualify for SuperLiga 2008.
# Starting in 2006, the Supporters' Shield winner for best regular season record receives one of the United States' two spots in the CONCACAF Champions Cup. The MLS Cup champion receives the other. In 2007, the regular season was reduced to 30 games (from 32).
# During the past few years, more bonuses for starts and wins have been incorporated into player contracts. In 2007, those bonuses will be paid once every two weeks instead of in one sum at the end of the year as in the past.
# Playoffs: At the end of the regular season, the top two teams in each conference earn playoff spots along with four "wild cards" which have highest point-totals in the standings, regardless of conference. This will add competition and intensity to the playoff race. If one conference is stronger than the other in a given year, more of its teams can qualify for the playoffs.
# On July 24, 2007, the inaugural edition of SuperLiga begins. This international tournament features four of the top teams from MLS and four of the top teams from Mexico's first division competing in a Champions' League-style format for a $1 million prize.
The MLS Technical Committee will continue to examine the competition format for possible changes in the future.

Officiating

* U.S. Soccer has hired full-time referees for the first time. Jair Marrufo, Ricardo Salazar, Baldomero Toledo and Terry Vaughn will become full-time referees, enabling them to focus their professional abilities on preparation and training.
* MLS has established the MLS Working Group on Officiating, which will conduct regular meetings between officials, coaches, and player representatives to promote better relationships and understanding of the rules and their application. Funding has been budgeted for the formal training of the first MLS player who decides to pursue a career in officiating.
* MLS works continuously with officials and players to protect player safety and prevent tactics that destroy the game. Among the new League initiatives for players and referees aimed at improving the attractiveness and rhythm of MLS games are:
o Players have been advised to no longer kick the ball out of play when a player is on the ground unless they believe a serious injury has occurred. The referee will stop play in cases of serious injury. This change is designed to help maintain the flow of the game and reduce the feigning or exaggerating of injuries as a tactic to stop play, kill momentum and waste time. If a team kicks the ball out of play deliberately, but the player down is not injured, there is no obligation on the part of the opponent to return possession to that team.
o Referees have been encouraged, at their discretion, to issue a yellow card caution to players who raise their hand with an imaginary card.
o Referees have been encouraged to issue a yellow card caution to players who embellish or feign contact or injuries in an attempt to have opponents cautioned or sent off or otherwise disrupt game flow.

Strategic Relationships

# On March 13, 2007, MLS and the German Bundesliga launched a new relationship that will foster collaboration between the Leagues on multiple levels. The Bundesliga is a world leader among soccer leagues in average attendance, stadium design, broadcast production, and corporate governance.
# MLS will strategically develop relationships with other leagues, federations, and clubs to glean the best applicable practices and maximize connectivity to the global soccer marketplace.
# MLS is actively exploring new, meaningful international competitions.

I really like the way this league is headed and I'm especially happy to see the part where referees are encouraged to give yellows to players who dive or fake injuries.

 

[hadareud]

****. manyoo just scored the 2:1 in the 93rd minute, it's going to extra time now. Arsenal were dominating and 1:0 up. I guess Utd are going through now.

The tempo and technique of both teams are absolutely incredible, this is not the same kind of youth football that was still being played a few years ago. At times it feels like watching a premiership game.

 

[Cornballer]

Also, Garber and Gazidis announced some initiatives for the league that they're calling Game First.

I really like the way this league is headed and I'm especially happy to see the part where referees are encouraged to give yellows to players who dive or fake injuries.

I agree. There are a lot of little changes in the list that bring us closer to international club standards. I'm pretty happy with most of the changes. Particularly with increasing the value of regular season performance.

****. manyoo just scored the 2:1 in the 93rd minute, it's going to extra time now. Arsenal were dominating and 1:0 up. I guess Utd are going through now.

The tempo and technique of both teams are absolutely incredible, this is not the same kind of youth football that was still being played a few years ago. At times it feels like watching a premiership game.

Sounds like a fun match. Who's been playing well for Arsenal?

 

[Cornballer]

Booooooooooo! I hate FIFA - such a poorly run organization and I'm not pleased with this jackass being in charge for another term...

Blatter only candidate for FIFA presidency
ZURICH, April 2 (Reuters) - FIFA president Sepp Blatter is the only candidate for the world governing body's presidential election to be held next month, it said on Monday.

No other candidate had entered the race by the March 31 deadline, FIFA said on its Web site (www.fifa.com), effectively confirming Blatter as FIFA president until 2011.

The governing body's presidential election is scheduled to take place on May 31 at the FIFA Congress in Zurich.

Sixty-six member associations from all six confederations nominated the 71-year-old Swiss for a third mandate.

Blatter, having announced he would stand for a further four-year period of office at the last Congress in June 2006, was pleased with the show of confidence in his presidency.

"I wish to thank all of the associations who have demonstrated their trust in me in this way," he was quoted as saying on the FIFA Web site.

"Over the past nine years, I have managed to overcome a range of difficulties and bring about several improvements thanks to their help and to the support of other members of the global football family.

ELECTION MANIFESTO

"During my third period of office, football will acquire a more pronounced and extensive social role," added Blatter who, despite being unopposed, will still announce his election manifesto at the FIFA Congress in Zurich's Hallenstadion.

In an interview with Reuters last month, Blatter said: "There's a French expression that says if you win without opposition it's a triumph without glory, but for me it's also a kind of glory when you know the history of my presidency".

Blatter beat off former UEFA president Lennart Johansson to win his first presidency in 1998 and came through a bitter fight in 2002 when he faced accusations of financial mismanagement following the collapse of FIFA's marketing partners ISL.

"They didn't want me in 1998, then they tried to kill me in 2002 and now they bring me the presidency on a platter, so that's also a kind of recognition and satisfaction," he added.

Blatter said last month the core message of his election manifesto would focus on football's social responsibility.

"We have worked to develop the game and bring it to the world, but now we have to do something in this world with the game for a better future."
In particular, Blatter said he wanted to tackle the financial imbalances caused by "over-investment" in the world's wealthiest clubs, deal with violence on and around the pitch and eradicate the persistent problem of racism.

 

[hadareud]

2:2! slightly undeserved but back in front.

Merida was running the show again, he's off now though. The whole team looks very tired now. There's quite a few players in there that could make it to the first team in the next couple of years.

 

[hadareud]

4:2 utd

looks over now

 

[Mama Smurf]

At least Villa drew, head up.

 

[hadareud]

At least Villa drew, head up.

yay! no money lost after all! well, actually I still lost 75p.


game is over, the manchester rovers youth team won 4:2, in the end the Arsenal team didn't have anything left. You could see the difference in age to the manutd team (around 1 year younger, 16 against 18 year olds) when their physical power faded away.

 

[Mama Smurf]

yay! no money lost after all! well, actually I still lost 75p.

(around 1 year younger, 16 against 18 year olds)

I see maths is taking a hit today

I know what you mean in both cases, really. I watched the Villa game, they probably should have won although both teams had a half on top each. I would have preferred to check out the youth game, but couldn't find a link.

How about that women's team though eh? 15 games played, 15 games won, 4 goals conceded, 85 goals scored. Let's let them play the Arsenal men, I wanna see what happens.

 

[hadareud]

:lol
yeah, that's my maths. I will go far.


not sure about women's football, I can't really get into it. It just feels very strange to watch women play football, especially in an Arsenal shirt. A friend of mine fancies one of the Arsenal girls though:

the one on the left. I think he's a bit of a pedo.

 

[Lakitu]

the one on the left. I think he's a bit of a pedo.

Is that him in the corner there?