Official Football Thread
- Thread starter national acrobat
- Start date
porcnoz
Trooper
Actually, I thought more about papers like this one or this other.
Albie
Keeping an open eye on the Weeping Angels.
I have to admit - if they laugh at us not qualifying, I have no issue with that (but on national TV is not very professional). I don't really take offence to what that German paper has done to Beckham (and I dare say Beckham wouldn't either), I just don't find it funny.Forostar said:
I dare say that if Germany had failed to qualify, you will find the odd laughter from the odd Englishman. But as the quote I mentioned before stated about the Germans screwing up a qualification, it just won't happen.
After getting over the disappointment of them not qualifying, I do feel that I would have preferred England to have been there this summer - and fail abysmally then. However, as McLaren is now no longer in charge, it has given the F.A. plenty of time to get his successor - and Martin O'Neill is the hot favourite. Good choice, let us hope they don't screw this one up as well and appoint another Englishman because he is English. I don't care where he (or even she) comes from, I just want the next England Manager to be good enough to get the results our team are capable of. For a side in the top ten, I expect at least a quarter final place in major tournaments (I probably would not expect more than that, though).
And the players have to accept the responsibility for this failure to qualify as well. For his faults, McLaren did have some good team selections and some good tactical awareness on occasions, but the players still let him down.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Forostar said:
Remember the show or the channel's name?
In the paper's defence*, that is supposed to be the hat of a dwarf, and the headline next to it reads something about England being the new football dwarves.
*don't want to diminish the fact that I think it is one of the the worst entities in the federal republic right now, though.
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
I think it was between 7 and 7.30, either ARD, either ZDF... OK, maybe he wasn't laughing but he certainly kept smiling pretty much. He was corresponding with a dude in London who checked some UK newspapers.
Without checking on internet: Was he the Celtic coach some years ago? Dude with dark hair and glasses?
Albie said:
Without checking on internet: Was he the Celtic coach some years ago? Dude with dark hair and glasses?
Albie
Keeping an open eye on the Weeping Angels.
That is the guy - but he only left Celtic a couple of years ago. He was linked with the job at the time McLaren was appointed, but was either overlooked, failed to impress the FA or (possibly more likely) could not spare the commitment due to his wife not been in the best of health (at the time). But one thing we must add, is that he was a key player during Nottingham Forrest's glory years when the legendary Brian Clough was the boss. So, guess where (and from whom) he learnt his trade?Forostar said:
A
Anonymous
Guest
Confusing.... sorry, my written English is not very good i suppose.
Forostar, Onhell and siebo666:
Why i wrote that post ? simply because someone wrote some things about primadonnas, cheating, whining and being ridiculous.
I´m sorry, but i cannot admit this. Every nation made mistakes, and have some players – although great – that made objectionable actions inside and outside of the field. In my opinion, it sounded a little bit xenophobe.
So, i wrote first this on a previous post: There is a dark side on every single country (or national team).... i hope you mean some players are "primadonnas", not all the players or the clubs.
But since i didn´t get any answer, and the provocation went on, i write this post:
I see some people really afraid of something....
Best games in World Cup 1966, Euro 1984, Euro 2000, Euro 2004, and only one defeat lolllllll
Tremble, my friends, when people only refer the bad, they usually are afraid of something....
Although i´m not the best fan of Mister Scolari... Mourinho near Scolari is a gentleman.
Why ? because i wanted to mention the positive side of the national team.
And then i edited it, and add to this the trivia.
Porcnoz: I wrote European Championships (best overall final results than England, for instance). If i was talking about the European Championships, why have you talked about the World Cup ? yes, Portugal – albeit something difficult to admit – has better overall final results in the European Championships Finals than England.
That’s all.
Forostar, Onhell and siebo666:
Why i wrote that post ? simply because someone wrote some things about primadonnas, cheating, whining and being ridiculous.
I´m sorry, but i cannot admit this. Every nation made mistakes, and have some players – although great – that made objectionable actions inside and outside of the field. In my opinion, it sounded a little bit xenophobe.
So, i wrote first this on a previous post: There is a dark side on every single country (or national team).... i hope you mean some players are "primadonnas", not all the players or the clubs.
But since i didn´t get any answer, and the provocation went on, i write this post:
I see some people really afraid of something....
Best games in World Cup 1966, Euro 1984, Euro 2000, Euro 2004, and only one defeat lolllllll
Tremble, my friends, when people only refer the bad, they usually are afraid of something....
Although i´m not the best fan of Mister Scolari... Mourinho near Scolari is a gentleman.
Why ? because i wanted to mention the positive side of the national team.
And then i edited it, and add to this the trivia.
Porcnoz: I wrote European Championships (best overall final results than England, for instance). If i was talking about the European Championships, why have you talked about the World Cup ? yes, Portugal – albeit something difficult to admit – has better overall final results in the European Championships Finals than England.
That’s all.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Forostar said:
Yes. but forget this issue, for me it is over.
Albie
Keeping an open eye on the Weeping Angels.
Talking of both Scolari and Mourinho, both names are actually in the frame for the England job. Mourinho is equal favourite with O'Neill, at the moment.
Not sure about overall - there may be not a lot in it, but in recent years - most definitely yes. After all, Portugal were the reason that England failed to progress in 2004 and, to a degree, 2000. But if you are talking strictly in terms of how each team has faired in the actual final of all the tournaments, then Portugal wins due to one final appearance in 2004 compared to none by England.Rotam said:
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
There are overall rankings for both the World Cup and the European Championships, comparable with e.g. medal lists of the Olympic Games:
World Cup:
Brazil
Italy
Germany
Argentina
Uruguay
France
England
Netherlands
Czechoslovakia
Hungary
Sweden
Poland
Austria
Portugal
Yugoslavia
USA
Chile
Croatia
Turkey
Spain
USSR
Belgium
Bulgaria
Korea Republic
For reasons of this order see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World ... onal_teams
European Championships:
Germany
France
Russia/ USSR
Czech Republic
Italy
Spain
Netherlands
Denmark
Greece
Yugoslavia
Portugal
Belgium
England
Hungary
Sweden
For reasons of this order see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Europ ... sification
World Cup:
Brazil
Italy
Germany
Argentina
Uruguay
France
England
Netherlands
Czechoslovakia
Hungary
Sweden
Poland
Austria
Portugal
Yugoslavia
USA
Chile
Croatia
Turkey
Spain
USSR
Belgium
Bulgaria
Korea Republic
For reasons of this order see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World ... onal_teams
European Championships:
Germany
France
Russia/ USSR
Czech Republic
Italy
Spain
Netherlands
Denmark
Greece
Yugoslavia
Portugal
Belgium
England
Hungary
Sweden
For reasons of this order see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Europ ... sification
. My mind is that if you want to compare two things, take all the significant datas.
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
England will be in "pot 2" together with Romania, Scotland, Bulgaria, Turkey, Russia, Poland, Sweden and Israel. In other words, these countries won't meet eachother in the upcoming qualification campaign for 2010 World Cup in South Africa.
Here two articles of today, the first about the draw, the second about Blatter's view on England.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
World Cup draw for Europe, Asia and Africa take centre stage in Durban
DURBAN, South Africa - With the World Cup still three years away, the qualifying hopes of many countries will be riding on Sunday's preliminary draw.
In a glitzy evening ceremony featuring balls drawn from glass bowls, organizers will set up the qualifying groups for Europe, Africa, Asia and North and Central America.
Smaller countries might get lucky with easy groups, while powerhouses like Germany could wind up with tough opposition in the two-year campaign to complete the 32-team field for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.
Only South Africa can watch with ease - as host, it has already qualified. Even defending champion Italy will have to play to reach the championship.
More than 3,000 people will fill the International Convention Center close to the Indian Ocean beaches on Sunday, with organizers counting on a flawless show to kick off their World Cup buildup.
"The preliminary draw is of paramount importance to us," said Danny Jordaan, the head of the organizing committee. "We have a unique opportunity to demonstrate our ability to organize a world class event."
Among the guests will be South African President Thabo Mbeki, FIFA president Sepp Blatter and soccer giants such as France's Marcel Desailly and Liberia's George Weah. The draw will be shown in 170 countries and territories as 200 teams take part in qualifying - both records.
The South American and Oceania campaigns have already started and will not be included in Sunday's draw.
The North and Central American group has a four-stage qualifying system. Mexico and the United States should have few problems advancing to the final stage where six teams vie for three automatic berths. The fourth-place finisher will face the fifth-place South American team in a playoff.
Canadian coach Dale Mitchell and team manager Morgan Quarry will be Durban for the draw.
Mitchell expects Canada to open qualifying next June with a home-and-away playoff series with the winner advancing in August to the 12-team CONCACAF semifinals, which will be split into three pools of four. The top two from each group will advance to the final round of qualifying in North and Central America and the Caribbean.
Most eyes will be on Europe, especially after four UEFA nations reached the semifinals of the 2006 World Cup in Germany.
England, which failed to qualify for the 2008 European Championship after its 3-2 loss to Croatia on Wednesday, is likely to miss out on a top seeding in Sunday's draw.
England dropped one spot to 12th in the FIFA world rankings issued Friday, leaving the English 10th of the European teams.
The Europeans will be drawn into nine qualifying groups. Since FIFA uses the rankings to decide the seedings, England would miss out.
Europe gets 13 places at the 2010 tournament. The nine group winners will qualify automatically, while the eight best runners-up will go into four playoff series.
The top seeds for Europe should be Italy, Spain, Germany, the Czech Republic, France, Portugal, the Netherlands, Croatia and Greece, and those teams will all be drawn in separate groups. A final decision on the draw procedures will be made Saturday.
Five African nations can qualify, with Nigeria and Cameroon looking to make up for missing out on the last World Cup.
In all, 48 African teams will be drawn into 12 groups, with the group winners and eight best runners-up advancing to the next round. Those 20 teams will then be drawn into five groups with the winners qualifying.
South Africa will participate in the competition only because it also serves as a qualifying event for the African Cup of Nations.
Asian qualifying is complicated. Australia is entering World Cup qualifying under the Asian umbrella for the first time and will only enter the competition in its third stage, along with South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Iran, Kuwait and Indonesia. After three tiers of qualifying, the 10 best teams go into two groups, where the top two will qualify. A fifth team will have to play the winner of the Oceania group.
--------------------------------------------
FIFA president Sepp Blatter said England's failure to reach the European Championship highlights the need for European nations to look at the influx of foreign players in their leagues.
"It is time that this item shall now be tackled very seriously," Blatter said Friday in the run-up to Sunday's qualifying draw for the World Cup.
The large foreign influence has been cited as one of the causes of a shortage of homegrown talent in England, whose national team lost 3-2 to Croatia at Wembley on Wednesday to miss out on Euro 2008.
Blatter has vied to reintroduce limits on foreign players in national leagues, a move which amounts to a direct challenge to labor laws of the European Union, where most of the world's leading leagues are.
By the 2010-11 league season, Blatter wants to have a system where a team's starting lineup would have at least six national players and he will take the issue to the FIFA Congress in Sydney next May.
The percentage of foreign players in leagues has often been the first issue many fans and officials center on when their national team falls on hard times. Yet, teams like AC Milan and Inter Milan are also loaded with foreigners and it did not stop Italy from winning the World Cup last year.
Even Blatter said the high percentage of foreigners in the Premier League was not the key issue in England's Euro 2008 demise.
"Definitely not. The qualification was really on the spot," he said, highlighting the tight race with Russia which went through because of a 1-0 win over Andorra.
The issue of foreigners in the Premier League gained prominence when Liverpool captain Steven Gerrard said quotas needed to be imposed to bring the national team back to prominence.
Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger, who sometimes fields a team without any Englishmen, claims instead that foreigners have raised the level of play in England. Forcing limits on them and replacing them with second-rate English players would drag the level back down, according to the Frenchman.
England star David Beckham, who played four years for Real Madrid, also embraces the mix of foreigners.
"There's many excuses out there that people can come up with but I don't think you can blame it on foreign players," he told the BBC. "For me, the foreign players have brought something special to the Premiership and our country."
Former France and Chelsea great Marcel Desailly says the influx of foreign stars in the Premier League should not be blamed for England's failure.
"It is true there is a small problem but it is not only that," he said.
Here two articles of today, the first about the draw, the second about Blatter's view on England.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
World Cup draw for Europe, Asia and Africa take centre stage in Durban
DURBAN, South Africa - With the World Cup still three years away, the qualifying hopes of many countries will be riding on Sunday's preliminary draw.
In a glitzy evening ceremony featuring balls drawn from glass bowls, organizers will set up the qualifying groups for Europe, Africa, Asia and North and Central America.
Smaller countries might get lucky with easy groups, while powerhouses like Germany could wind up with tough opposition in the two-year campaign to complete the 32-team field for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.
Only South Africa can watch with ease - as host, it has already qualified. Even defending champion Italy will have to play to reach the championship.
More than 3,000 people will fill the International Convention Center close to the Indian Ocean beaches on Sunday, with organizers counting on a flawless show to kick off their World Cup buildup.
"The preliminary draw is of paramount importance to us," said Danny Jordaan, the head of the organizing committee. "We have a unique opportunity to demonstrate our ability to organize a world class event."
Among the guests will be South African President Thabo Mbeki, FIFA president Sepp Blatter and soccer giants such as France's Marcel Desailly and Liberia's George Weah. The draw will be shown in 170 countries and territories as 200 teams take part in qualifying - both records.
The South American and Oceania campaigns have already started and will not be included in Sunday's draw.
The North and Central American group has a four-stage qualifying system. Mexico and the United States should have few problems advancing to the final stage where six teams vie for three automatic berths. The fourth-place finisher will face the fifth-place South American team in a playoff.
Canadian coach Dale Mitchell and team manager Morgan Quarry will be Durban for the draw.
Mitchell expects Canada to open qualifying next June with a home-and-away playoff series with the winner advancing in August to the 12-team CONCACAF semifinals, which will be split into three pools of four. The top two from each group will advance to the final round of qualifying in North and Central America and the Caribbean.
Most eyes will be on Europe, especially after four UEFA nations reached the semifinals of the 2006 World Cup in Germany.
England, which failed to qualify for the 2008 European Championship after its 3-2 loss to Croatia on Wednesday, is likely to miss out on a top seeding in Sunday's draw.
England dropped one spot to 12th in the FIFA world rankings issued Friday, leaving the English 10th of the European teams.
The Europeans will be drawn into nine qualifying groups. Since FIFA uses the rankings to decide the seedings, England would miss out.
Europe gets 13 places at the 2010 tournament. The nine group winners will qualify automatically, while the eight best runners-up will go into four playoff series.
The top seeds for Europe should be Italy, Spain, Germany, the Czech Republic, France, Portugal, the Netherlands, Croatia and Greece, and those teams will all be drawn in separate groups. A final decision on the draw procedures will be made Saturday.
Five African nations can qualify, with Nigeria and Cameroon looking to make up for missing out on the last World Cup.
In all, 48 African teams will be drawn into 12 groups, with the group winners and eight best runners-up advancing to the next round. Those 20 teams will then be drawn into five groups with the winners qualifying.
South Africa will participate in the competition only because it also serves as a qualifying event for the African Cup of Nations.
Asian qualifying is complicated. Australia is entering World Cup qualifying under the Asian umbrella for the first time and will only enter the competition in its third stage, along with South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Japan, Iran, Kuwait and Indonesia. After three tiers of qualifying, the 10 best teams go into two groups, where the top two will qualify. A fifth team will have to play the winner of the Oceania group.
--------------------------------------------
FIFA president Sepp Blatter said England's failure to reach the European Championship highlights the need for European nations to look at the influx of foreign players in their leagues.
"It is time that this item shall now be tackled very seriously," Blatter said Friday in the run-up to Sunday's qualifying draw for the World Cup.
The large foreign influence has been cited as one of the causes of a shortage of homegrown talent in England, whose national team lost 3-2 to Croatia at Wembley on Wednesday to miss out on Euro 2008.
Blatter has vied to reintroduce limits on foreign players in national leagues, a move which amounts to a direct challenge to labor laws of the European Union, where most of the world's leading leagues are.
By the 2010-11 league season, Blatter wants to have a system where a team's starting lineup would have at least six national players and he will take the issue to the FIFA Congress in Sydney next May.
The percentage of foreign players in leagues has often been the first issue many fans and officials center on when their national team falls on hard times. Yet, teams like AC Milan and Inter Milan are also loaded with foreigners and it did not stop Italy from winning the World Cup last year.
Even Blatter said the high percentage of foreigners in the Premier League was not the key issue in England's Euro 2008 demise.
"Definitely not. The qualification was really on the spot," he said, highlighting the tight race with Russia which went through because of a 1-0 win over Andorra.
The issue of foreigners in the Premier League gained prominence when Liverpool captain Steven Gerrard said quotas needed to be imposed to bring the national team back to prominence.
Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger, who sometimes fields a team without any Englishmen, claims instead that foreigners have raised the level of play in England. Forcing limits on them and replacing them with second-rate English players would drag the level back down, according to the Frenchman.
England star David Beckham, who played four years for Real Madrid, also embraces the mix of foreigners.
"There's many excuses out there that people can come up with but I don't think you can blame it on foreign players," he told the BBC. "For me, the foreign players have brought something special to the Premiership and our country."
Former France and Chelsea great Marcel Desailly says the influx of foreign stars in the Premier League should not be blamed for England's failure.
"It is true there is a small problem but it is not only that," he said.
Albie
Keeping an open eye on the Weeping Angels.
I'm sorry, but Sepp Blatter is wrong (not totally wrong), mind. In truth, England failed to qualify, in my opinion, on the strength of one result - the 0-0 draw against Macedonia at home. It was that result that put the pressure on England so early on in the campaign. However, they did concede one or two soft goals that didn't help - they may not have affected the end result in those games, but it just made matters worse.
As I said before, players from Chelsea, Man U and Liverpool (aside from Arsenal, they are the best teams in the Premiership) make up a large percentage of the England squad and these players are not just squad players (look at Chelsea with Terry or imagine Liverpool without Gerrard, for example). Both Spain and Italy are in Euro 2008 and both have a humongous amount of foreigners in their respective leagues. And it did not help England qualify for USA 94 when the three foreign players rule was in force when competing in Europe.
I would think that England has one of the biggest league structures in the world - 92 professional clubs spread out over four leagues. Then we have a whole host of non-league sides that are semi-professional. This is where the English players need to be plying their trade in readiness to be picked up by a Premiership club, or Premiership players are sent out on loan too to gain experience of playing week in week out (Beckham was loaned out to Preston early on in his career at Man U). And on top of that, if we have Premiership team adopting a good youth policy like Man U did in the early 90's, there should be no reason to worry about foreigners in our league. Middlesbrough, for example, have realised it makes good business sense to nurture young local talent. In the long run, it will save the club a lot of money - and as a side effect, help out the national team.
As I said before, players from Chelsea, Man U and Liverpool (aside from Arsenal, they are the best teams in the Premiership) make up a large percentage of the England squad and these players are not just squad players (look at Chelsea with Terry or imagine Liverpool without Gerrard, for example). Both Spain and Italy are in Euro 2008 and both have a humongous amount of foreigners in their respective leagues. And it did not help England qualify for USA 94 when the three foreign players rule was in force when competing in Europe.
I would think that England has one of the biggest league structures in the world - 92 professional clubs spread out over four leagues. Then we have a whole host of non-league sides that are semi-professional. This is where the English players need to be plying their trade in readiness to be picked up by a Premiership club, or Premiership players are sent out on loan too to gain experience of playing week in week out (Beckham was loaned out to Preston early on in his career at Man U). And on top of that, if we have Premiership team adopting a good youth policy like Man U did in the early 90's, there should be no reason to worry about foreigners in our league. Middlesbrough, for example, have realised it makes good business sense to nurture young local talent. In the long run, it will save the club a lot of money - and as a side effect, help out the national team.
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
Albie said:
Indeed, Italy are the World Champions.
Albie said:
Side effect? It's a normal issue and at the moment the main issue.
Readiness to be picked up by a Premiership club? Premiership clubs should be more ready to pick up the players.
Perhaps this league structure is too big (quantity is not the same as quality) and too strict, to get a decent chance to play at the highest level, while rich clubs are getting better foreigners (easy and fast, more than ever), making it harder to break through. I underlined that because I find it hard to deny this concurrence. If the system didn't change compared to earlier times, then definately something else did. I have nothing against foreigners (I have a foreign wife myself). It's according to EU rules that people can travel and live freely, wherever they wish to stay. But does it really not influence the quality of the English national team in any way?
Albie said:
Well, might be a sad truth. Still, there were other factors. For the record you might like to compare some stats:
England stats 1994 FIFA World Cup qualification
England stats UEFA Euro 2008 qualifying
Pts Pld W D L GF GA GD
13 10 5 3 2 26 9 +17
23 12 7 2 3 24 7 +17
You could say that the 1993/1994 group was weaker than this year but I am not sure about that. That time, the last three (Poland, Turkey, San Marino) can be seen as the same kind of opposition as the last three of this campaign (Macedonia, Estonia, Andorra).
I rate the Netherlands of 1992/1993 higher than the Russia of 2006/2007. In 1992/1993 Norway had one of their best periods in their history. At USA 94 they didn't manage to go to the next round, but they had a hard group (including finalist Italy), with the most amazing end score ever.
Team Pts Pld W D L GF GA GD
Mexico 4 3 1 1 1 3 3 0
Ireland 4 3 1 1 1 2 2 0
Italy 4 3 1 1 1 2 2 0
Norway 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 0
Back to 2006/2007:
Scotland played in a very difficult group and still they got more points than England. I am sorry that these two countries don't meet for the 2010 qualifications!
I even think the Scots did better than the Germans and the Czechs. OK, Scotland did not qualify, but Germany and the Czech Republic played in a very weak group. Hardly any resistance. So, this time I find it hard to judge the strength of these two nations. They are not my favourites.
My main conclusion? Perhaps England's problem is not only the foreigners in the Premier League, but the team is weaker than in 1993/1994.
Eddies Wingman said:
Yep, I think it will be at 16.00 CET.here the details for Europe.
Click here for Africa, here for Asia (this time, including Australia), here for North, Central American and Caribbean and here for South America.
Albie
Keeping an open eye on the Weeping Angels.
I don't think the team is weaker now than it was in 1993/94 (to the contrary, actually) - the problem is that the opposition is better. For example, in the qualifying group for USA '94, England played Turkey home and away and this was an almost guaranteed 6 points - not any more, Turkey are a good side nowadays.Forostar said:
Scotland did do better than England in their campaign, but they did have a tougher group which, believe it or not, helped them (look how they struggled away to Ukraine). England are the same and always fair well against serious and better opposition - it's the good to middle ground teams that England struggle against. Getting into the second pool of seeds will help England in qualifying for 2010 - they will be in a better group with better teams. If we look back at the teams England had when qualifying for previous tournaments, they had some tough opposition and when faced against this, they topped the group (France '98 - Italy, World Cup 2002 - Germany, Euro 2004 - Turkey). In qualifying for Euro 2000 they had one of these good to middle ground teams and cocked it up - only scrapping past Poland to finish second to face a play off with Scotland. And again they were not overall that convincing in qualifying for 2006 World Cup, yes they won the group, but only just - again, Poland ran them close.Forostar said:
I'm not too sorry we don't face Scotland in the next qualifying group and I wouldn't think the Scots would be too displeased either. Yes they are buoyant at the moment, but a Scotland v England game is one that England have in recent times faired better. Just because they ran Italy close, is no guarantee they could beat England.
The Premiership's richest club (and current Champions - Man U) has also got the one of the best youth policies. This is the team that gave us Beckham, Paul Scholes, Nicky Butt, Ryan Giggs (yes, he's Welsh - but he came through this policy), Keiren Richardson, etc., yet still buy foreign. This is how teams should be conducting their business.Forostar said: