egafd.com

Club sides are more important than the national team in Spain. It's about coaching. Nothing else.

Other nations develop footballers and then work on their fitness to compete at the highest level. We pick the biggest, fastest kids and then try and turn them into footballers.

It's too easy to blame the players, too easy to blame the premier league and the amount of foreign players and too easy to moan about winter breaks etc........we need to teach kids how to play football.

It's about the coaching, and we don't develop enough quality coaches.

planeterotica wrote:

> Most players in International teams can understand some English
> so they can work out the instructions our players are shouting
> to each other, but turn it around how many England players can
> speak Portuguese, Spanish or Italian etc, this would give other
> teams a slight advantage over England and at this level a
> slight advantage is all you need..


Are you serious?

Regarding the coaching side of things, I heartily agree with Sam. For a nation of our size we have far too few coaches of an acceptable standard. As for the "too many foreigners" excuse... how many foreign players were there when England failed to qualify in 1974, 1978 and 1994?

The main problem lies in the mindset of the nation...

Go and watch an U-12s game in this country. Players are primarily picked on size rather than ability. They use a full-sized pitch. Parents along the touchline act like hooligans and tell their kids to "get stuck in" A win-at-all-costs mentality reigns. Losers are mocked.

Go and watch an U-12s game in Holland and you'll see something completely different. Firstly the pitch is much smaller, so you don't have kids running around like headless chickens chasing long balls they'll never reach. Skill is more important than size, and honing that skill is the ultimate aim. Winning is the least important aspect of the game. Enjoyment in playing and learning new techniques are what's important. No player is told "you're a centre back" or "you're the main striker" One week they'll play as a defender, the next week an attacker, and the week after as a midfielder... they have a holistic approach to coaching.

The wages the Premier League and the Sky TV deals allow the clubs to pay mean that, however good an English player may be, they'll almost certainly not move abroad to expand their footballing knowledge anyway (not that anyone is currently good enough anyway).

You only have to look at the player ratings of the English press for Gerrard an average of 5-6/10 performance. AS in Spain gave him zero out of 3 and a paper in France gave him 3/10. We think that because he played a few decent balls down the channels he had a decent game!

It's our culture. The press, the fans, the coaching.......everything. It's always 'try harder' and not 'try smarter'.

Chris Waddle made a good point on 606 too. We always try and pick the best individuals and try and mould them into a team rather than picking the players that fit into a system. Van Haal has always relied on 3 creative players and fitted the rest of the team around them. That's why he likes young players. They're happy to play a certain limited role for the good of the team as a whole.

I'm pretty sure I posted pretty similar posts to my last few just after the WC in South Africa and Germany before that. Nothing changes.

I think the last time I thought of England having a chance to win either the European Championship or World Cup was probably in the period 90-96.

Since then, irrespective of how they have done, I have always thought of the England team as playing fearful, crap football. This year was a bit different. They played attacking football without much of a defence.

I suspect the advent of the Premier League and the huge sums of money that came into the game in the early 90's has had a big effect on the England team. WIth the setup of the Premier League, it became the promised land with the huge money from Sky Sports etc. The result of this was that clubs would do anything to stay in the League or get into it. And that anything more often than not meant quick fixes in which instead of nurturing home grown talent over a period of years, clubs looked for the finished article from overseas.

The result - home grown players unable to break into the first team and develop and get experience against top class sides either in the UK or in Europe.

David Johnson wrote:

> I think the last time I thought of England having a chance to
> win either the European Championship or World Cup was probably
> in the period 90-96.
>
> Since then, irrespective of how they have done, I have always
> thought of the England team as playing fearful, crap football.
> This year was a bit different. They played attacking football
> without much of a defence.
>
> I suspect the advent of the Premier League and the huge sums of
> money that came into the game in the early 90's has had a big
> effect on the England team. WIth the setup of the Premier
> League, it became the promised land with the huge money from
> Sky Sports etc. The result of this was that clubs would do
> anything to stay in the League or get into it. And that
> anything more often than not meant quick fixes in which instead
> of nurturing home grown talent over a period of years, clubs
> looked for the finished article from overseas.
>
> The result - home grown players unable to break into the first
> team and develop and get experience against top class sides
> either in the UK or in Europe.


On the basis of you blaming foreigners (the "quick fix option" you mention) please explain the failure of England teams to even qualify for the 1974, 1978 and 1994 World Cups and 1984 European Championships.

It has nothing to do with foreign players... it's all down to poor coaching from an early age. Of the current England squad only Ross Barkley may have a long-term future at the highest levels, and he's very one-footed (again, down to poor coaching at an early age)

"please explain the failure of England teams to even qualify for the 1974, 1978 and 1994 World Cups and 1984 European Championships."

I can just as easily cherry pick with reference to not qualifying for the Euros in 2008 and never going further than the quarter finals in either competition.

To repeat, the only sides I can remember in recent memory who I thought had a chance to actually win was Italia 90 and the Euros in 96. Ever since they have looked nowhere near and the results in both major competitions back that up i.e. no further than the quarter finals.

I certainly agree about the coaching deficiencies but that is not the only reason.

" Of the current England squad only Ross Barkley may have a long-term future at the highest levels, and he's very one-footed (again, down to poor coaching at an early age)"

Luke Shaw? Oxley Chamberlain? Interestingly enough, Shaw, Chamberlain and Barkley all made their name at two Premiership teams that made an exception to the rule by using their financial constraints as a motivator in academy development.

The only time I have enjoyed watching England in the last 20 odd years was when Hoddle was in charge. That was a side that was comfortable on the ball and looked like they were a match for most teams.

The side in 1990, although a good side were fortunate to get to the semis. I always look back on who did we beat?.....Belgium, Cameroon and Egypt...wow!

As for not qualifying in 74 & 78, you could say we were a bit unfortunate to not qualify. We've all seen the highlights where we battered Poland at Wembley, only to draw the game in a group of 3 where only one side qualified.
Poland couldn't of been that bad as they finished 3rd in the World cup beating Brazil in the play off.

Again in 78, only one team went through and we finished 2nd on goal difference to Italy.

I am one of those who believes we should restrict the number of foreigners in our league. To me it should be more about quality rather that quantity.

[quote]I am one of those who believes we should restrict the number of foreigners in our league. To me it should be more about quality rather that quantity.[/quote]

What you say doesn't make much sense though. Being for restrictions on foreigners will mean more English players playing (quantity) but won't guarantee more quality. So sort of the opposite of what you were saying.

Lots of foreigners means only the better players get through. And they only way they'll get through is being good and well coached.

What about all the crap foreigners who are given a chance at the expense of young English players, especially by Foreign managers?