World Cup

[barrycowdrill]

Isolated discussion on Pearce aside......

 

Listing a load of overhyped players doesn’t change that. Beckham and Scholes aside those players never performed on the big stage or did so very rarely.

 

Those golden generation players were lauded because they did well for club sides. But for England they didn’t perform.

 

I’m not blinded by modern day reporting or glitz and glamour of football now. 90s team has some proper proper footballers. Rather watch that team any day than most of the overrated overpaid lot you are banging on about.

Check the trophy hauls in the 2 squads pal and get back to me

[bwfcfan5]

Check the trophy hauls in the 2 squads pal and get back to me

Why wouldn’t we just check their performance in world cups and Euros? Given that is more pertinent to the discussion.

 

Gary Neville might have won more trophies than most players in the world by virtue of being at one of the richest clubs in world football for so long. Doesn’t mean he’s better than a lot of players who haven’t.

 

You can’t compare trophy hauls across an era where English clubs were banned in Europe and the England squad was drawn from a wider pool than just the top 4 clubs in England. Different eras in that sense.

 

But you can compare how close they came to actually winning the World Cup.

[birch-chorley]

The point being, we had a much better squad that underperformed for England due to poor management and lack of desire

 

You seem to be making the point that the Italia 90 squad was better because it got to a semi whilst disregarding club careers

 

Greece won the Euro’s, Portugal the last ones, generally average players in both squads

 

What a player does for their club is a much greater indicator of how good they are as a player. Afterall it accounts for 95% of their playing career

[bwfcfan5]

The point being, we had a much better squad that underperformed for England due to poor management and lack of desire

 

You seem to be making the point that the Italia 90 squad was better because it got to a semi whilst disregarding club careers

 

Greece won the Euro’s, Portugal the last ones, generally average players in both squads

 

What a player does for their club is a much greater indicator of how good they are as a player. Afterall it accounts for 95% of their playing career

It’s an indicator of how good they are for their club. If players have a lack of desire to play international football then it is fair to say that for England they were shite.

 

Whether that is because they couldn’t be arsed or just weren’t that good the end result is they were shite.

 

Beyond that I don’t particularly care how Gary Neville did at Man Utd. In 50 years people will still talk about Gazza and Lineker that night in Turin. Nobody will even remember Gary Neville or anything about his England career whatsoever.

[birch-chorley]

Of course they will be talking about players such as Gerrard, Lampard and co in years to come

 

You called them overhyped, which of course is a load of bollocks as they were fantastic players

 

It appears now that your back tracking and saying that ‘for England they were shite’

[jayjayoghani]

The GG was littered with players competing at the business end of the Champions League year in year out. All of whom had over 50 caps. Surely it's not in dispute these were great players.

 

Of course they underperformed.

[bwfcfan5]

Of course they will be talking about players such as Gerrard, Lampard and co in years to come

 

You called them overhyped, which of course is a load of bollocks as they were fantastic players

 

It appears now that your back tracking and saying that ‘for England they were shite’

 

Nobody will talk about them for England, because they never performed.

 

We're talking about players playing for England. Were Gerrard, Lampard etc as good as people built them up to be? If they were they never translated that into performances for the national team. 

 

In fact the so called golden generation in my view were technically less gifted than the 90's team. That team even by the German's admission were incredibly unlucky not to win that WC. The golden generation never came close, and looked lumbering, tired and one paced compared to their opponents.

 

That is my view. I'm not anywhere near convinced most of them were as good as made out. Beckham, Scholes and Shearer at their best were world class players. Rooney for one tournament was. For me the rest were not, or at least never proved they were.They had great club careers no doubt, but that doesn't mean those players were world class or top international players. 

 

But the rest in my view were very good players but not the world superstars they were made out to be. Perhaps they were and the balance in the squad was never right. Certainly we didn't have players who went past opposition players, whereas in 90 we had loads of those types in the side. 

 

When you look at the golden generation and watch the sides they faced, we moved the ball slower, those other sides had players who technically (In my view) for their countries at least were able to outplay us. Was that ability, attitude or whatever? Does it matter?

[barrycowdrill]

 Was that ability, attitude or whatever? Does it matter?

well it does matter because the whole crux of your argument is the 90's team had better ability than the GG.

 

you even went as far to say they were the most technically gifted since 66!!! but your using how far that team got in ONE competition as your barometer. which is a completely different point.

 

some of the most work man like teams in history have upset the apple cart and won tournaments. Greece & Portugal in the Euros, Porto and inter in the CL. No one on this earth can tell me they had the teams with the most ability. But they had a team ethic, worked their arses off and took their opportunity. Just like the 90s team. THAT i will give them over the GG every day of the week

 

Was the 90's team all round a better unit? possibly and their success at Italia 90 would support that. But, from a technical point of view that 04 side were on another level individually.

 

the technical element was your sole point. nothing else, You have now made it about all the other elements that make up a successful team to validate your argument.

 

line up the 90s semi final team against the 04 team i mentioned against Portugal and who gets in? id give you 3. 4 if i was being very generous.

 

Gazza, Lineker & Waddle. 

 

but Neville, Terry, Cole, Scholes, Rooney, Gerrard piss all over your Parker, Pearce, Mark Wright, Platt & Beardsley 

 

fact 

[enzo gambaro]

some of the most work man like teams in history have upset the apple cart and won tournaments. Greece & Portugal in the Euros, Porto and inter in the CL. No one on this earth can tell me they had the teams with the most ability.

The starting eleven when Inter won the CL won getting on for a thousand international caps between them, including 268 for Brazil, 276 for Argentina and 133 for Holland (that’s just Wesley Sneijder).

 

Workmanlike might be stretching it.

[barrycowdrill]

The starting eleven when Inter won the CL won getting on for a thousand international caps between them, including 268 for Brazil, 276 for Argentina and 133 for Holland (that’s just Wesley Sneijder).

 

Workmanlike might be stretching it.

 

granted, the point was more about there being far more gifted teams in the competition. Jose created a fantastic unit which ended with them winning the treble.

 

The most gifted on paper dont always win all the prizes..

 

So just because one team got to a WC semi final once doesnt mean they had the most ability 

Edited June 26, 2018 by barrycowdrill

[bwfcfan5]

granted, the point was more about there being far more gifted teams in the competition. Jose created a fantastic unit which ended with them winning the treble.

 

The most gifted on paper dont always win all the prizes..

 

So just because one team got to a WC semi final once doesnt mean they had the most ability 

 

Think we'll have to agree to disagree here. In my view how people perform for England is relevant in discussing how good they are as international players. 

 

I get that the golden generation included huge club names, and that on paper those players were all top level players. I totally get that view.

 

However, I disagree that they were better than the 90's team. It entirely depends how you look at it, how you rate players. 

 

My view is that if you could have the players from 90 in their prime vs the golden generation also in their prime that the 90's team would win. 

Edited June 26, 2018 by bwfcfan5

[madthatter]

 

 

My view is that if you could have the players from 90 in their prime vs the golden generation also in their prime that the 90's team would win. 

 

I'd agree on that, actually.

 

Which, to bring things full circle, supports the idea that it was management that brought the success . . . and failure.

 

Perhaps Ferdinand was right . . .

[barrycowdrill]

I'd agree on that, actually.

 

Which, to bring things full circle, supports the idea that it was management that brought the success . . . and failure.

 

Perhaps Ferdinand was right . . .

 

Thank you and good night 

[Dr Faustus]

Like the 90s team were greater than the sum of their parts?

 

Just fucking say that then!

[bwfcfan5]

I'd agree on that, actually.

 

Which, to bring things full circle, supports the idea that it was management that brought the success . . . and failure.

 

Perhaps Ferdinand was right . . .

 

I don't buy it was the management, not entirely. They had numerous managers those players....I think it was the players themselves. A mixture of not being as good as people think they are, and not applying themselves properly. 

[Zico]

I don't buy it was the management, not entirely. They had numerous managers those players....I think it was the players themselves. A mixture of not being as good as people think they are, and not applying themselves properly. 

 

I'd part of it is if players were "allowed" to turn up and go off in their cliques and not talk to each other and other such attitude along with other such attitudes to playing for their national team, the manager wasn't doing their job

 

probably a problem stemming from the manager not being English

 

I doubt that team from 1990 would've gone far with someone like Capello or Ericsson at the helm who probably cared less than the players

 

end of the day, it was a different era, in 1990, the players and manager would've walked over broken glass to play for England

 

in the 00s, you've got the highly paid technical athletes being told that their club who pay their wages are the priority, by managers who are pulling them out of games at any opportunity, and all that

 

whilst this WC team is probably the most highly paid team we've ever had, at least the English manager looks to have put some pride back into turning up and playing

 

it's not just about having an English manager mind, as shown by McLaren and Hodgson

[barrycowdrill]

Like the 90s team were greater than the sum of their parts?

 

Just fucking say that then!

 

are you being a clown on purpose? 

 

The 90's team were a decent team but the management got success out of them and their desire to play for England no doubt got them to over achieve

 

The GG were on paper a much better team ie: more ability across the whole team. However through their lack of passion for the national side along with definite errors from the management team made them under achieve

 

Is. Not. Difficult 

Edited June 26, 2018 by barrycowdrill

[bwfcfan5]

I'd part of it is if players were "allowed" to turn up and go off in their cliques and not talk to each other and other such attitude along with other such attitudes to playing for their national team, the manager wasn't doing their job

 

probably a problem stemming from the manager not being English

 

I doubt that team from 1990 would've gone far with someone like Capello or Ericsson at the helm who probably cared less than the players

 

end of the day, it was a different era, in 1990, the players and manager would've walked over broken glass to play for England

 

in the 00s, you've got the highly paid technical athletes being told that their club who pay their wages are the priority, by managers who are pulling them out of games at any opportunity, and all that

 

whilst this WC team is probably the most highly paid team we've ever had, at least the English manager looks to have put some pride back into turning up and playing

 

it's not just about having an English manager mind, as shown by McLaren and Hodgson

 

Aye well, we had Hoddle then Keegan.

 

I think its complex but the line about highly paid technical athletes who prioritised club over country sums it up for me. 

 

I fell out of love with the England team. Something I never thought would happen. Because of their attitude. I couldn't support Rooney, Gerrard et al after constant failure, talk of sulking behind the scenes and preferring their clubs. 

 

I get football is different, it absolutely is, you can't compare a lot of things.

 

The golden generation were undoubtedly fitter and better athletes than in 90, but were they better footballers? Nobody in the GG came close to Gazza for technical ability in the middle of the pitch. Not close. 

[Whites man]

There’s a lot of Premier League hype behind the whole golden generation thing. If you accept Brazil in 2002 and Spain 2010 were worthy winners then that leaves only the 2006 tournament they could have won. Were any of the gg better players than Totti, Pirlo and Buffon for Italy or Henry, Viera and Zidane for France?

 

If anything that team was let down by the manager and especially his squad selection. He took 4 forwards; Wayne Rooney (recovering from injury), Michael Owen ( recently recovered from a recurring hamstring injury), Theo Walcott (child) and Peter Crouch (Peter Crouch). Even with the expected goals from midfield that is ridiculous.

[Dr Faustus]

are you being a clown on purpose?

 

The 90's team were a decent team but the management got success out of them and their desire to play for England no doubt got them to over achieve

 

The GG were on paper a much better team ie: more ability across the whole team. However through their lack of passion for the national side along with definite errors from the management team made them under achieve

 

Is. Not. Difficult

Whoo tetchy. Go and have a fucking lie down; the heat is clearly getting to you.

 

I was actually supporting your point; as you say, GG had great ability. 90 had collective desire and things just clicked.

 

Keep sipping the water and find some shade.

 

It's. Getting. Warm.

[barrycowdrill]

Whoo tetchy. Go and have a fucking lie down; the heat is clearly getting to you.

 

I was actually supporting your point; as you say, GG had great ability. 90 had collective desire and things just clicked.

 

Keep sipping the water and find some shade.

 

It's. Getting. Warm.

 

sorry pal at first glance i thought someone else had written it, wasnt directed at you 

Edited June 26, 2018 by barrycowdrill

[gonzo]

I was just looking at list of ballon’dor winners upon the request of my lad. As you do on Saturday night like

 

Notice lampard and gerrard came 2nd and 3rd in 2005.

 

Owen won it 01

 

Overrated my arse.

 

Mismanaged yes. Club football took priority, it’s as simple as that.

 

This explains a lot about that team. Not sure if it’s already been posted but it should have.

 

 

http://www.youtu.be/kRdbUfcBPZw

 

As for 1990 team being better, pretty much the same lot minus Gazza didn’t win a game at Euro 88.

Edited June 30, 2018 by gonzo

[birch-chorley]

Gerrard and Lampard were all talk Gonzo, not a patch on Chris Waddle

[madthatter]

I was just looking at list of ballon’dor winners upon the request of my lad. As you do on Saturday night like

 

Notice lampard and gerrard came 2nd and 3rd in 2005.

 

Owen won it 01

 

Overrated my arse.

 

Mismanaged yes. Club football took priority, it’s as simple as that.

 

This explains a lot about that team. Not sure if it’s already been posted but it should have.

 

 

http://www.youtu.be/kRdbUfcBPZw

 

As for 1990 team being better, pretty much the same lot minus Gazza didn’t win a game at Euro 88.

 

That doesn't surprise me but fcuk me that's painful to hear.

 

Not an ounce of regret either other than 'of course we'd have like to have won'.  cnuts

[madthatter]

This is as good a WC as I can remember.

 

Always better when the hosts do well as well.

 

On that, I've heard not one report of bother, racism or the like . . . hmm

 

Would it be fair to say those accusing the Russians of racism may have been being a bit, you know . . . ?!