Topic: Your England Squad for WC2010 Sath Efrika

[Ronaldo]

As I said yesterday, Walcott won't thrive in a team that gradually get their players up the pitch as Arsenal do. He's a player that would look far more useful in a different setup.

[Kid Icarus]

As I said yesterday, Walcott won't thrive in a team that gradually get their players up the pitch as Arsenal do. He's a player that would look far more useful in a different setup.

That might be the case, Im thinking about that run on the break against Liverpool last season, but I'd still have Beckham purely for that reliability in his 1 dimensional game. I think if we're taking Agbonlahor, then there's no need for Walcott.

[Jayson]

Beckham offers us something different on the wing, we should take him for that reason alone.

We may easily come up against a competent fullback who could take our more direct skillful wingers out of the game. Having someone who can loop in beautiful crosses from most distances is always going to be a useful tool. No point having to many players who are very similar on the same side.

[Neil]

As I said yesterday, Walcott won't thrive in a team that gradually get their players up the pitch as Arsenal do. He's a player that would look far more useful in a different setup.

That might be the case, Im thinking about that run on the break against Liverpool last season, but I'd still have Beckham purely for that reliability in his 1 dimensional game. I think if we're taking Agbonlahor, then there's no need for Walcott.

Unless Walcott ups his game with Arsenal (or Agbonlahor has a serious decline) it would be a travesty if the former went ahead of the latter. We don't need (don't have space for) both.

[Yorkie]

Rooney could play with anyone and still be effective to some extent. The trick is getting Wayne Rooney to play at his best, and in a role where he can cause the most trouble. From what i've seen of England - this happens when someone (not Peter Crouch) is holding the line. So Rooney can reap havoc, buzzing around every square metre of the final third.

Enter Heskey. He's not prolific in the slighest but gives something to the team that no one else can.

And tbh i wouldn't be surprised to see him kick into goalscoring action when he realises it's gonna be his last World Cup, and bizarrely, in an epic turn of fortune - he's been selected as the main man. He's not incapable of scoring like. You'd think Capello had proven to the nation that's not about picking the 11 best individuals.

[Ronaldo]

Get the best out of Rooney and Lampard and you've guarenteed a place in the last 4, in my opinion.

[Neil]

Rooney could play with anyone and still be effective to some extent. The trick is getting Wayne Rooney to play at his best, and in a role where he can cause the most trouble. From what i've seen of England - this happens when someone (not Peter Crouch) is holding the line. So Rooney can reap havoc, buzzing around every square metre of the final third.

Enter Heskey. He's not prolific in the slighest but gives something to the team that no one else can.

And tbh i wouldn't be surprised to see him kick into goalscoring action when he realises it's gonna be his last World Cup, and bizarrely, in an epic turn of fortune - he's been selected as the main man. He's not incapable of scoring like. You'd think Capello had proven to the nation that's not about picking the 11 best individuals.

Yep. As has been chanted relentlessly, it's getting best out of the 11 players collectively that will give us the best chance, not picking the 11 'best' players. Of course, we do need players with particularly outstanding quality - Rooney being the prime example.

[Yorkie]

Agreed, and the qualifiers suggest Heskey's a big part of that. Especially the former.

I know we didn't play the best nations in the qualifiers. However, we utterly trounced Croatia and Ukraine - actually looking like a 'top-tier' international outfit - rather than just plodding past the also-rans, like in years gone by. The likes of Spain and Brazil would do the same to nations like that; it's something we haven't done properly for a good few years now. We're not the best in the world but we're definitely in the same category as those nations. Can't wait for the World Cup.

[Neil]

Agreed, and the qualifiers suggest Heskey's a big part of that. Especially the former.

I know we didn't play the best nations in the qualifiers. However, we utterly trounced Croatia and Ukraine - actually looking like a 'top-tier' international outfit - rather than just plodding past the also-rans, like in years gone by. The likes of Spain and Brazil would do the same to nations like that; it's something we haven't done properly for a good few years now. We're not the best in the world but we're definitely in the same category as those nations. Can't wait for the World Cup.

Disagree. Personally I think Brazil and Spain are ahead of the rest. I would be particularly annoyed if we got beat by anyone else.

[Ronaldo]

Nah, we'll beat Spain if we perform like we should. I can't really see where they'll hurt us. Xavi and Iniesta won't know what's f***ing hit them against two proper english midfielders. And as for that defence, raped.

[Kid Icarus]

The way I see it is that Spain are a better team than anyone out there.


England's players aren't as good as 2006, but have a better manager now who will play a better team than 2006.

[Yorkie]

Yeah yeah, pedants.

Those two are in a division, of their own, okay. But for once we do have a team good enough to atleast make a stab at the big-time, rather than a few individuals.

[Ronaldo]

The way I see it is that Spain are a better team than anyone out there.


England's players aren't as good as 2006, but have a better manager now who will play a better team than 2006.

Who isn't as good?

[Yorkie]

One thing i hope about the coming World Cup, is that teams don't go all cagey - like in 06 - as soon as the knockouts kick in. f***ing hell, it was like two different tournaments. The group stages were epic; nations like Ghana, Japan, the Ivorians, Aussies - just f***ing going for it cos they had nowt to lose. But i think Argentina/Mexico was the only decent game in the knockout stages.

I also pray for a miracle ban on vuvuzelas before kick off. But that won't happen. Can see the mute button coming into play a few times.

[Neil]

Nah, we'll beat Spain if we perform like we should. I can't really see where they'll hurt us. Xavi and Iniesta won't know what's f***ing hit them against two proper english midfielders. And as for that defence, raped.

The problem however isn't just Xavi and Iniesta. Villa and Torres for example could punish a tiny error. They're such a slick, well-oiled machine, and I think are too good to be simply outmuscled, outpowered, or whatever word you want to use. We'll need to take our chance against them and defend like we've never f***ing defended before.

[Ronaldo]

Nah, we'll beat Spain if we perform like we should. I can't really see where they'll hurt us. Xavi and Iniesta won't know what's f***ing hit them against two proper english midfielders. And as for that defence, raped.

The problem however isn't just Xavi and Iniesta. Villa and Torres for example could punish a tiny error. They're such a slick, well-oiled machine, and I think are too good to be simply outmuscled, outpowered, or whatever word you want to use. We'll need to take our chance against them and defend like we've never f***ing defended before.

We kept 4 clean sheets out of 5 in 2006 didn't we? I have every confidence we'll defend well again.

[ElDiablo]

I think it's Brazil's to lose. Spain are quite weak at the back, certainly weaker than Brazil.

[Yorkie]

It looked like it was Brazil's to lose last time aswell tbh. Germany and Argentina were the two best footballing teams at the tournament last time out; was a total injustice that they got each other in the quarters.

[Cronky]

It goes to show how settled and advanced our squad is, that our collective choice isn't likely to differ from Capello's.

I'd always try to find room for SWP, and as I'm not sure that Beckham is really adding much, he'd be the one to make way.

I hate to admit it, but Milner has played his way into the squad. What's more, he'd give you cover all across the midfield, which makes Beckham even more superfluous.

[Neil]

Nah, we'll beat Spain if we perform like we should. I can't really see where they'll hurt us. Xavi and Iniesta won't know what's f***ing hit them against two proper english midfielders. And as for that defence, raped.

The problem however isn't just Xavi and Iniesta. Villa and Torres for example could punish a tiny error. They're such a slick, well-oiled machine, and I think are too good to be simply outmuscled, outpowered, or whatever word you want to use. We'll need to take our chance against them and defend like we've never f***ing defended before.

We kept 4 clean sheets out of 5 in 2006 didn't we? I have every confidence we'll defend well again.

We did defend well. We didn't come up against anyone particularly near the same standard as this current Spain side, though. I have faith we'll defend well against most teams, but Spain aren't (currently) like 'most teams'.

[Ronaldo]

To say we'll have to 'defend like we've never f***ing defended before' is a tad OTT in my opinion. Terry and Ferdinand are probably the best two CB's in the world on form and Ashley Cole is without doubt the best LB.

Would be nice if Gerrard brokes Torres' leg in training.

[Kid Icarus]

The way I see it is that Spain are a better team than anyone out there.


England's players aren't as good as 2006, but have a better manager now who will play a better team than 2006.

Who isn't as good?

The one's in bold have got worse or have been replaced with someone worse imo, the ones in italics have improved or been replaced by someone better imo.

1 Robinson (James/Green)
2 Neville • (Johnson)
3 A. Cole •
4 Gerrard • (Form)
5 Ferdinand • (Injury/Form)
6 Terry •
7 Beckham • (Age/Form)
8 Lampard •
9 Rooney •
10 Owen • (Heskey)
11 J. Cole • (Injury)
12 Campbell (Lescott)
13 James
14 Bridge •
15 Carragher • (Upson) On par I'd say.
16 Hargreaves • This is the main one for me, obviously due to injury. But I dont think Barry is anywhere near on par with what Hargreaves was...tbf we all thought Hargreaves would be s*** though.
17 Jenas (Milner)
18 Carrick •
19 Lennon •
20 Downing • (Richards)  Where else would I have put him?
21 Crouch •
22 Carson • (Hart)
23 Walcott • (Defoe)

[Ronaldo]

I personally think our best 11 is better now. The players remaining from 2006 are all better with the exception of Joe Cole.

[Cronky]

Barry isn't our best player, but his emergence as our first choice anchor man in midfield has been a real boost. Previous England teams have tended to have a clogger in there, and that's held us back. Barry can pass as well as get forward if opportunity presents.

[Kid Icarus]

I personally think our best 11 is better now. The players remaining from 2006 are all better with the exception of Joe Cole.

My point is that they play better in the team now, but some key players aren't as good players as they were for their respective teams in 2006.

I think Rio, Gerrard have gone downhill but are still excellent obviously, whereas Hargreaves and Neville have been replaced with players that aren't as good. Joe Cole isn't up to full fitness, and Im not sure about Lennon's effectiveness against the top teams.

Long story short if Capello was our manager in 2006 I think we'd have been a better team than we are now.