The Premier League was nothing more than a new version of Division One for the first part of it's life. It only started to take a life of it's own in the early to mid noughties and, instead of improving the English game, at best it's allowed it to stagnate.
I still don't think the PL is to blame. The simple fact is that even though we may have some talented players and are capable of putting on great performances occasionally, we simply are not good enough to go all the way (without the aid of home advantage). That's the way it has been and always will be.
Can someone explain to me why ITV are so determined to take the sympathetic line with England rather than the critical line?
Because they're being fair? I was far more angry at our performances in 2010 than this year. This was an inexperienced and it was always going be a struggle.
I'd disagree we were beaten by one man. That was an aspect but overall we just looked poor.
I'm not quite sure what our set up was. We weren't pressing for the ball like they were, that's fine. So maybe we're set up for counter attacking?
Nope. If we won the ball back chances are it would end up around the back four.
Okay so possessive football? That would be great but wasn't helped by the piss poor passing that seemed to mainly go side ways or back.
Maybe we wanted to play it on the wing? That seemed to be the intention but was never helped by the fact there was only ever 1 person in the box when we were in the wing.
I've given Hodgson the benefit but I can not understand what our set up was. Like the ITV panel said our goal was a scrappy tackle and a tap in.
Exactly. The team set up made no sense, the only game plan seemed to be to put 3 strikers and 1 winger up top and have 2 central midfielders playing deep. No link between midfield and attack, no players making runs from deep, not enough tracking back from the forwards so the defense didn't get enough protection (particularly out wide).
I refuse to believe that Hodgson got the best out of the players available to him.
Makes you laugh that the England players are trying to make a fast buck off the back of the adverts on tv........ Daniel Sturridge with Subway and Joe Hart with Doritos.
Never mind the ads guys try playing football properly and winning a match or two ....... ouch too late. .
Without Suarez we would have probably beaten Uruguay - Poyet said as much. They aren't that great and rely on the finishing of one player to get them through.
Nothing to do with the Premier League, our performances in major tournaments in the 22 years after the formation of the Premier League is better than the 22 years before.
1970-1992 (World Cup and Euros)
Semi Final - 1 (1990)
Quarter Final - 2 (1970, 1986)
Last 12/16 - 1 (1982)
Group Stage - 3 (1980, 1988, 1982)
Failed to qualify - 5 (1972, 1974, 1976, 1978, 1984)
1992-2014
Semi Final - 1 (1996)
Quarter Final - 4 (2002, 2004, 2006, 2012)
Last 16 - 2 (1998, 2010)
Group Stage - 2 (2000, 2014?)
Failed to qualify - 2 (1994, 2008)
To be fair, the ruling changed in regards to getting through to knockout stages, so your comparisons are pretty meaningless.
eg England in 82 won 3 games (beating the likes of France 3-1), and drew 2 against Spain and Germany yet went out.
You don't need stats to see the decline of Englands decline anyway, anyone old enough to have watched them will have seen it with their own eyes.
Can someone explain to me why ITV are so determined to take the sympathetic line with England rather than the critical line?
They're not doing anyone any favours. The audience wouldn't be offended if the panel were hugely critical of the performance. Roy Keane is badly missed (he tore into Ireland after they lost 4-0 to Spain at Euro 2012)
We need fast players who can literally run with the ball and appear from nowhere, like Croatia. We need to make our chances not wait for them, and a defence like Chile wouldn't go amiss either.
Unless we develop English players and play them more, we'll never have a chance in the World Cup. And nor will we deserve it.
I still don't think the PL is to blame. The simple fact is that even though we may have some talented players and are capable of putting on great performances occasionally, we simply are not good enough to go all the way (without the aid of home advantage). That's the way it has been and always will be.
Why, though? Spain's dominance coincided with Barcelona and Real Madrid kicking on in La Liga with both teams containing a large contingent of Spanish players. Premier League successes have been based on foreign players. What are they doing right that we're not and shouldn't we be learning from them?
I actually agree with Chiles. We can't keep picking a player and go "it was him that is why we lost". Why can't they just say England lost because England were the worse team. We rarely looked a threat going forward! Not solid at the back. Couldn't pass and tried the exact same against Italy which practically is an instruction manual for Uruguay on how to play against us.
PRoblem is we don't have any players like Saurez or Pialo or Nessi. Rooney was our 'supposed' star player but at World Cup level he is just average. Not surprised we got beat to be honest, they always disappoint when it really counts.
Rooney actually played well, but the rest of the team were a total letdown. Gerrard was a big disappointment.
You can thank this disaster of a world cup to those idiots who called for the 'old guard' to be dropped in favour of these 'fresh young talents'. Absolute morons, and to think as well that they were going after Rooney's head as well. Gerrard has been rubbish as captain as well. We undoubtedly would've done much better with the likes of John Terry, Ashley Cole, Frank Lampard and Rio Ferdinand.
Because they're being fair? I was far more angry at our performances in 2010 than this year. This was an inexperienced and it was always going be a struggle.
We reached the last 16 in that World Cup. And as poor as we were we had a decent defence until we were torn apart by a superior Germany. Italy and Uruguay weren't impressive at all and we lost to them both, this can't be dressed up as anything but failure.
Scrappy game. England are never good to watch although the ITaly game we had some good passes. Suarez is a genius though. Liverpool supporter so good to see him score.
What normally happens is we struggle in the group against some lower ranked sides, then get knocked out in the knock out stage by the likes of teams like Uruguay and Italy. We just met them earlier this time.
Agree it was a really tough group and to be honest I expected Italy and Uruguay to qualify from it so I'm not too surprised by the results. England just aren't good enough against the better teams.
Sky and the Premier League are definitely to blame.
Beaten by Balotelli and Suarez.
It's all about money in the PL ... and England will NEVER do well whilst we still buy foreign players.
Even worse are the thoroughly average "Wigan" type foreign players (sorry, Wigan fans ... there are plenty of other teams) who deny good English players prospects to progress.
Italy and France have worked it out ... why can't we?
That's our problem though. Teams don't need to overrun us to beat us.
We are so predictable and easy to defend against - too direct and most of our attacks come down the wing. England teams try to batter their way through rather than picking passes and opening teams up, and only seem capable of scoring from crosses. Almost every England attack ends up with ball being played out wide.
We never play our way through the middle and lose the battle in midfield no matter how many players we have in there. There's no creativity or anything there. Our players' technique is vastly inferior to the better teams.
Our defence tonight was god-awful as well.
I agree with this for the most part actually. I just think some of the criticism from some quarters (probably casual fans who only watch at international tournaments) as been rather ridiculous. After all, how much were people expecting from this World Cup?
England were not abysmal but not creative or energetic enough bar the five minutes after they scored. Some of those players definitely get by on reputation at this stage rather than what they add to the team. I think someone like Milner would have been a good pick for the midfield because he has pace, power and work ethic. I think they need to ditch the last of the old hands and decide who they want to be the next batch of stars to build towards Euro 2016 afresh. I certainly don't think this has been a calamity though.
england were second best again..slow and ponderous in midfield with little creativity and all round just not good enough .....cavani and suarez were class and quality for uruguay and suarez isnt fully fit
Comments
I still don't think the PL is to blame. The simple fact is that even though we may have some talented players and are capable of putting on great performances occasionally, we simply are not good enough to go all the way (without the aid of home advantage). That's the way it has been and always will be.
Because they're being fair? I was far more angry at our performances in 2010 than this year. This was an inexperienced and it was always going be a struggle.
Exactly. The team set up made no sense, the only game plan seemed to be to put 3 strikers and 1 winger up top and have 2 central midfielders playing deep. No link between midfield and attack, no players making runs from deep, not enough tracking back from the forwards so the defense didn't get enough protection (particularly out wide).
I refuse to believe that Hodgson got the best out of the players available to him.
Totally agree, don't they get paid enough?!
They are not alone in that though , are they ?
To be fair, the ruling changed in regards to getting through to knockout stages, so your comparisons are pretty meaningless.
eg England in 82 won 3 games (beating the likes of France 3-1), and drew 2 against Spain and Germany yet went out.
You don't need stats to see the decline of Englands decline anyway, anyone old enough to have watched them will have seen it with their own eyes.
They're not doing anyone any favours. The audience wouldn't be offended if the panel were hugely critical of the performance. Roy Keane is badly missed (he tore into Ireland after they lost 4-0 to Spain at Euro 2012)
Aye, you're right. It could be worse.
We could support a team that makes a habit of not even qualifying!
Unless we develop English players and play them more, we'll never have a chance in the World Cup. And nor will we deserve it.
Why, though? Spain's dominance coincided with Barcelona and Real Madrid kicking on in La Liga with both teams containing a large contingent of Spanish players. Premier League successes have been based on foreign players. What are they doing right that we're not and shouldn't we be learning from them?
Jesus people we've hardly been destroyed. This has been a huge improvement on 4 years ago.
Rooney actually played well, but the rest of the team were a total letdown. Gerrard was a big disappointment.
We reached the last 16 in that World Cup. And as poor as we were we had a decent defence until we were torn apart by a superior Germany. Italy and Uruguay weren't impressive at all and we lost to them both, this can't be dressed up as anything but failure.
https://twitter.com/1971domrch/status/479731855340896256/photo/1
And have never won. But we can rely on there always being a smug ***t to come in and gloat.
Agree it was a really tough group and to be honest I expected Italy and Uruguay to qualify from it so I'm not too surprised by the results. England just aren't good enough against the better teams.
England haven't been good enough for the past 48 years now!!!
That's a lot of bad luck. ;-):D
Beaten by Balotelli and Suarez.
It's all about money in the PL ... and England will NEVER do well whilst we still buy foreign players.
Even worse are the thoroughly average "Wigan" type foreign players (sorry, Wigan fans ... there are plenty of other teams) who deny good English players prospects to progress.
Italy and France have worked it out ... why can't we?
I agree with this for the most part actually. I just think some of the criticism from some quarters (probably casual fans who only watch at international tournaments) as been rather ridiculous. After all, how much were people expecting from this World Cup?
England were not abysmal but not creative or energetic enough bar the five minutes after they scored. Some of those players definitely get by on reputation at this stage rather than what they add to the team. I think someone like Milner would have been a good pick for the midfield because he has pace, power and work ethic. I think they need to ditch the last of the old hands and decide who they want to be the next batch of stars to build towards Euro 2016 afresh. I certainly don't think this has been a calamity though.