I think both the players and the manager have let the fans who travelled to Brazil down.

We need a manager who isn't afraid to be bold. An England manager who will come out and say that any England players sitting on the bench week in week out at top clubs can kiss their Internatiobal careers goodbye unless they are playing most weeks. A manager who is bold enough to push to change other things that are damaging England's chances. But we will probably never get that.

How is 1966 relevant to 2014? How do you define a top team? Uruguay finished below Ecuador in qualifying, are they a top team? You are making excuses for failure.

I can't really disagree with that. Hodgson maybe could have done things differently, but he's not the first to just play the big names from the big clubs rather than assemble a team.

The point is, now is his chance. The old guard are finished and the likes of Gerrard should be put out to pasture. I think they will be and Roy has taken a few youngsters to this tournament, which gives me some hope.

Believe me, if that same back four and the likes of Gerrard, Johnson and Welbeck start in our first euro qualifying game, I will be calling for his head as well.

Fair enough.

Maybe I'm being pessimistic but I think the team will be pretty much the same. And if Gerrard doesn't retire then I don't think Roy will drop him.

Did you see his post match interview after Costa Rica? He was genuinely pleased with the performance, which is baffling in itself.

No, I'm recognising the fact that we are not amongst the elite teams of world football and have no reason to expect to beat the likes of Italy or Uruguay- especially with the squad we took to this World Cup.

Why do you think England should beat Italy or Uruguay?

We have absolutely no real pedigree in international tournaments at all. Even in 1990 we were bloody lucky. We only won one group match and that was against those world beaters, Egypt. We could only draw with Ireland and Holland. We barely scraped past the mighty Belgium in the next round and then needed extra time to beat Cameroon. The first decent side we came up against, West Germany, sent us home.

The fact is, we are nowhere near as good as you seem to think we are or should be.

This group is far harder than most England will face. I don't see it as a major underachievement. They were the 3rd best side in the group on FIFA rankings (and by most neutral observer's opinion) and finished 4th.

17 world cup campaigns since 1950

1950 - Lost in groups
1954 - QFs - Lost to Uruguay
1958 - Lost in groups (Johnny Haynes remarked after elimination in 1958: "Everyone in England thinks we have a God-given right to win the World Cup." - How little things change!)
1962 - QFs - Lost to Brazil (Winterbottom)
1966 - Won as host nation (Ramsey)
1970 - QFs - Lost to West Germany (Ramsey)
1974 - Did not qualify (Revie)
1978 - Did not qualify (Greenwood)
1982 - Lost in round 2 groups (Greenwood)
1986 - QFs - Lost to Argentina (Robson)
1990 - SFs - Lost to West Germany (Robson)
1994 - Did not qualify (Taylor)
1998 - Last 16 - Lost to Argentina. (Hoddle)
2002 - QFs - Lost to Brazil (Eriksson)
2006 - QFs - Lost to Portugal (Eriksson)
2010 - Last 16 - Lost to Germany (Capello)
2014 - Lost in groups (Hodgson)

European Championships (might as well include them since they are the other major event in international football for England so should count when considering England's record).

1964 - Did not qualify (Ramsey)
1968 - SFs - Lost to Yugoslavia (Ramsey)
1972 - Did not qualify (Ramsey)
1976 - Did not qualify (Revie)
1980 - Lost in groups (Greenwood)
1984 - Did not qualify (Robson)
1988 - Lost in groups (Robson)
1992 - Lost in groups (Taylor)
1996 - SFs (as hosts) - Lost to Germany (Venables)
2000 - Lost in groups (Keegan)
2004 - QFs - Lost to Portugal (Eriksson)
2008 - Did not qualify (McLaren)
2012 - QFs - Lost to Italy (Hodgson)

Spain (winners of the last 3 tournaments they've entered) losing in the groups is a major upset but even then a lot of people thought they were on the way down anyway and Chile and Netherlands were quality sides. England qualifying and going out in the groups isn't a major shock. It's one of their most common results.

I don't really like comparing modern football to football from the 50s and 60s though. The qualifying procedure and format has changed so much that it's difficult to judge how strong sides were. (Not to mention how borders have changed due to politics as well.)

if hodgson was honorable he would offer to resign like the italian and spanish coaches

I don't think Italy and Uruguay are elite teams at all, and yes I do think we should have got the results to take us through to the next round and Hodgson is to blame. Again, I don't think 1990 is relevant to today, but we lost that one on penalties didn't we?

But of course there is truth to your point, we do struggle to get over the line when we come up against top teams. But how is Roy Hodgson going to change that? He's dull, middle of the road, uninspiring, pushing 70 and a bit of a joke in the media. What evidence do we have to suggest he will improve for the Euros and next World Cup?

Actually, looking at their record, England are probably due a run in the Euros more so than the World Cup (which their record is decent in). Considering that it's easier to win since there are less top sides, 2 semi-finals out of 13 events is quite poor.

I do agree that you can't really compare today to decades gone by. But even if we take, say the period since 1994, it is our worst performance at a major tournament apart from the disaster of Steve McClaren.

Italy have won the tournament 4 times and are consistently ranked as one of the world's best teams. What reason have we to expect to beat them when we are one-time winners (as hosts) nearly 50 years ago? We are also lower than both them and Uruguay in the current rankings.

In 1990, our best performance since 1966, we won just 3 games against Egypt, Belgium and Cameroon. We also lost to Italy in the 3rd place play off. Not really that impressive after all is it? Even in Euro 96 we only actually won 2 matches, as we could only draw with Switzerland and needed penalties to get past Spain before going out against Germany.

The truth is we are not the world beaters some people seem to think we are. We really have no reason or right to go into tournaments expecting to win them or turn over sides like Italy or Uruguay - especially in South America, where no European team has ever won the World Cup.

The squad we took to Brazil was poor, even by England's standards and it shouldn't really come as a surprise to anyone that we didn't get out of a group that had Italy and Uruguay in it. We need to keep a sense of perspective here. We didn't get battered by anyone and put in a perfectly respectable performance against Italy that people praised us for. But for Louis Suarez we might have squeezed past Uruguay and made it out of the group. It's really not as bad as people are making out.

I will judge Hodgson by what he does in the qualifiers for the euros. We have an easy qualifying group and this is his chance to put together a new team with some promising fresh faces in it.

Since 1994 then (handy how that's just after Taylor's reign).

It is the worst world cup result since not qualifying in 1994 but it's not staggeringly bad, and I think the 2010 team actually played worse but got further due to being seeded higher really.

You've went one round less than in 1998 and 2010 and two rounds less than 2002 and 2006. Had you finished 3rd or worse in your qualifying group and missed out on the finals then I'd call that a major underachievement.

England aren't Brazil or Germany (compare the records). The only time they looked close to winning anything (since 1994) was in 1996 Euros and even then they struggled early doors and only really performed well in the final group game, then got lucky against Spain, then got unlucky against Germany (I'd say overall England were the better side that day even if Germany also missed chances and hit the post themselves, but I thought Spain were robbed against England the round before, so it sort of evened itself out). And being host of a tournament does seem to give nations more of a chance so I would call that an expected result really.

(Edit - you beat me to it Flat Matt!)

Dunno I quite like Hodgson. This from an outsider.
He had the nerve to play the kids , Ok gerrard etc didn't perform but what you wanting a miracle?
Other teams are better than England hardly the managers fault. The players have to perform on the world stage can't blame the manager for everything.

Where's the honour in giving up? Look at how it can be spun.

Its the team that is the issue. You could have ever manager who won every Word Cup and then employ them as a massive joint effort and they still would not get England to perform.

I'm far from a hodgson fan but he qualified in his pragmatic style then EVERYONE pressed him to go for youth and go for a new style , so he did picking a youthful team for which he was almost universally applauded then it went wrong & the same people who applauded then pilloried .

I'm not sure they could have done anything with England to be honest.

We had Fabio Capello who is on a par with those guys & they played worse under him at WC 2010, even if they got further than Hodgson's team.

qualified is nothing

England
Ukraine
Montenegro
Poland
Moldova
San Marino

won by one point. We should cruise through qualifying in this company.

among others

Belgium won by 9
Italy by 6
Germany by 8
Netherlands by 9
Switzerland by 7
Spain by 3 (from France)


Primarily, we have robust rather than skilful forwards, and a defence that is not as good as we thought.

It doesn't matter how many times Italy have won the tournament, they were very poor this year, Uruguay weren't great either. I still want to know why you think Hodgson is going to improve things?


'Youthful team' was a bit of a myth really, other than Sterling and Barkley (a substitute), the team picked to play the first two matches should have been in or close to their prime.

Italy were poor this year by their standards, but they were still better than us and probably always will be.

I think Hodgson will improve things because I can already see improvement in certain aspects of our play despite the squad being absolutely dire.

The performance against Italy was a refreshingly positive one and we were unfortunate not to get something out of that. We actually kept possession of the ball and played a patient passing game, which is very unlike England. Roy is trying to change the way we play and I applaud him for that because it's what needs to be done.

I fully expect to see a new look England team for the qualifiers and I believe Roy will start building a side around the younger players who have gained valuable experience from this World Cup. This World Cup was about transition and looking to the future. It was widely accepted that we went into this tournament with a weak, makeshift squad and facing a very difficult group that we would struggle to get out of. We weren't seeded for this tournament for very good reasons.

I honestly don't understand why some fans expected anything of this England team because the pundits sure as hell didn't. Roy has taken over at a difficult time and performed about as well as can be expected. He stepped in at short notice for the euros a couple of years ago and did surprisingly well - and he's done about as well as anyone could have realistically expected in this tournament with a team that is weaker than we had two years ago.

Hodgson should be judged by how we perform in the euros in two years time. By then he'll have had the time and opportunity to put together a new England team that is 100% his own. He started rebuilding England in this tournament and by the time of the euros in 2016, the job should be more or less complete. He deserves the chance to put that new team together.

Don't blame Hodgson ? Blame the greedy clubs and their fans and the Premiere League where 80% employ foreign players .

How can any England manager find quality players in depth with such a ludicrous set up .

The so called English league is just a training ground for all these foreign players who must be laughing their heads off at the stupidity of the English .

It makes me laugh in commentary after commentary when I hear 'Oh such a player is playing for this and that English club .

Wise up England if you want to have an England team that you can be proud of and that will do you proud on the world stage .

Otherwise be prepared to suffer more and more humiliation from an England team .