***Official*** Road to Euro 2012

[cpr]

Alot of Englands style of play is get it to the frontman as fast as possible so we can surprise an attack. Its about as surprising as a Richard comment on First Chance Average, and about as enjoyable. Our midfields job half the time is to pick up the long punts that fell short. Alas Rio, for a his 'nice-footwork-for-a-defender', is usually the worst culprit for club and country, and even when he's out, the mentality is still there.

 

[Uppercut]

It was shown up particularly badly yesterday because Switzerland did it so much better than England despite being a very ordinary side.

 

[Furball]

Wasn't the case with France '98-'00, was it?

The side which won the World Cup was vastly different (and inferior) to the side which won Euro 2000.

Doubt the Brazillians have had many players playing together at one side for the last 3 decades atleast either or maybe more.Even the Argentinians.

Obviously it helps Spain that there are so many Barca players, but it is not something which has not been overcome in the past.

I'm talking about sides that have had sustained success over a period of time.

In the last 40 years that narrows it down to essentially 3 sides - Holland 74-78, West Germany 72-76, and Spain 07-present.

 

[Uppercut]

So basically all of the successful international sides had a body of players that played together at club level. Apart from the ones that didn't.

 

[Furball]

So basically all of the successful international sides had a body of players that played together at club level. Apart from the ones that didn't.

The sides that have had sustained success.

 

[Uppercut]

Like Holland '74-'78. They won loads and loads and loads of trophies. Unlike Brazil '94-'02.

You're being a bit silly.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I really don't know how it's happened, but England are somehow 4th in the FIFA rankings.

Given our last two competitive home games result in draws against the might of Montenegro and Switzerland, the combined population of both being about half of London's, this strikes me as a slight anomaly. Could anyone explain? Vimes? Mr P?

 

[marc71178]

I believe we paid the 4th highest amount to FIFA's ranking man - no other logical answer.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I really don't know how it's happened, but England are somehow 4th in the FIFA rankings.

Given our last two competitive home games result in draws against the might of Montenegro and Switzerland, the combined population of both being about half of London's, this strikes me as a slight anomaly. Could anyone explain? Vimes? Mr P?

The rankings are weighted towards the last 12 months, and give a bonus to teams not playing friendlies. As the South American sides have spent the past 12 months doing that, their ranking is artificially low for a month until Copa America matches go on the computer.

I also note the position of Norway, who has not qualified for a major tournament this millennium, but are nevertheless among the top nine in Europe and will thus be top seeds in the 2014 World Cup qualification.

 

[Stapel]

All the great national sides have been based around a core of players who play together at club level.

In the last 40 years that narrows it down to essentially 3 sides - Holland 74-78, West Germany 72-76, and Spain 07-present.

Would you care to enlighten me which core of players played together at club level? and for which club?

Please do not say Ajax, as I am very happy to point out that of the 1978 Dutch WC team, only 3 players of the 22-men selection played for Ajax. In 1974, it was 6 out of 22. Three of them were in the defense line-up.


I have to agree with uppercut here.

 

[Stapel]

I really don't know how it's happened, but England are somehow 4th in the FIFA rankings.

Given our last two competitive home games result in draws against the might of Montenegro and Switzerland, the combined population of both being about half of London's, this strikes me as a slight anomaly. Could anyone explain? Vimes? Mr P?

I can't think of anything more ridiculous than the FIFA rankings. It has always been crap and probably always will be.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah, we're 2 or 3 places too low FFS

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I can't think of anything more ridiculous than the FIFA rankings. It has always been crap and probably always will be.

Further to this:

it's likely that Brazil will not be top-10 in May 2013, as they do not play any competitive football in the next two years.

Crap indeed.

 

[marc71178]

Well they've hardly pulled up many trees when they've played competitively so why should they be ranked any higher?

 

[Magrat Garlick]

^ but they'll be third or fourth - most likely third - in the rankings for July. So either one of them must be wrong.

Even if they win all their friendlies they'll be hard pressed to avoid falling to anything better than 8th or 9th at some point.

 

[Nate]

Is there any point in calling them friendlies? Can't they all be competitive?

 

[grecian]

Well, we've dropped Lumps, personally I don't mind him when he's not playing with "Stevie G", but it's probably a good move, a chance to get away from the ridiculously hyped, complacent, and lets face it, quite crap "golden Generation". Shame Terry is still there, and Cashley might have been under threat if there was another left-back in the country.

Not a big fan of Young, Smalling, Parker or Downing, but am willing to see a change.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Yes Terry should have been retired after the last World Cup.

Would have liked Adam Johnson in the starting line-up. Gets ****ed about enough at Man ****ty as it is.

 

[MW1304]

Good atmosphere. Especially as we were told it wasn't going to be much.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Is it me or do we actually have a team of 11 players who are all playing in the right position?