Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 17 May 2012, 1:09 pm

I would take Holt from Norwich over Carrol.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 17 May 2012, 1:58 pm

Personally I think the squad is distinctly underwhelming, but I can't really think of many who would be better choices.

Good job Hodgson is used to turning around mediocre squads.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 17 May 2012, 2:34 pm

I was disappointed with Terry's selection because I think he's past it and could do more harm than good if he turns out to be a divisive influence in the squad. Presumably Hodgson has taken soundings on that before picking him though. Downing was an odd selection too given the season he's had at Liverpool, but I assume he's in there with a view to coming off the bench if we're defending a lead.

I agree with the choice of Andy Carroll. He's been woeful for Liverpool this season but seems to be finding form at the right time, and he offers far more potential than either Crouch, Holt or Zamora, who were his rivals for the spot. If he plays as well as he can then he's going to terrify defences, so as he's in form right now we may as well take a punt on him.

My guess is England will line up with a 4-4-1-1. It'll probably look something like this:

Hart
Johnson-Cahill-Terry-Cole
Walcott-Parker-Barry-Young
Gerrard
Rooney

I'm guessing Welbeck will get the nod for the games where Rooney is suspended.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 17 May 2012, 2:49 pm

Sweden are not the team they used to be, and France will either turn up and shine, or have a meltdown. To be honest though England tend to struggle against teams at the Ukraine level in finals groups, and the first game is always nervy. So we will be lucky to get out of the group.

I doubt the FA would sack Hodgson in the summer unless he really messes up. They will see how the WC qualifiers go first.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 17 May 2012, 3:04 pm

Carrick would seem the better bet. Gerrard is the only one of our midfield players who's suited to the withdrawn forward role so if we drop him back then we have to go 442 instead.So far as I'm aware Hodgson has never played 433, and in truth I'm not sure England have the players for it anyway.

Lampard has played a sitting role in the past but it's not ideally suited to his game. This is why I prefer Carrick if Parker doesn't make it. The system could only work if we have two sitting midfielders to free up everybody else to get forward.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 18 May 2012, 6:34 am

ruff
Andy Carrol is a unique player with a dominant air game.

Dominant? Without a lot of actual scoring I don't think the word applies... What is it that he's dominating? The two yards on either side and above the goal frame?

ruff
Holt is a opportunistic poacher.

Who scores. Call him whatever you want, to be in a position to score and then deliver is the main purpose of the central striker.

I'll go with actual proven results over theory that actually doesn't deliver as proposed.
Kinda like how I approach economic theory and politics.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 18 May 2012, 7:03 am

Lineker was also an adept goal-hanger, and scored quite a few goals. I've not been impressed with Carroll since he went to Anfield. Saying that, though, I think Holt would struggle against national sides with quality defences.

Also, goal poaching relies on chances being created and being able to get into positions, which I'm not sure we are quite in the business of doing with this squad. So I understand Holt being out. We know Carroll can be good, perhaps the national pride thing will restore his game.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 18 May 2012, 9:47 am

To be honest, I prefer Jermaine Defoe to Willem Dafoe. The latter is a great character actor, but he can't cross for toffee :wink:
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 18 May 2012, 12:44 pm

Holt has had one ok season where he scored about 15 goals, several of which were penalties. He's also topped the charts for yellow cards, and that's in a very physical league like the Premiership. Can you imagine what international refs would make of him ?

Ultimately, selecting either Carroll or Holt would constitute a gamble. I think Carroll is a better gamble because he offers the potential to totally change the game through a different style of play, making him a real weapon off the bench. Holt doesn't really give you that.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 83
Joined: 18 Apr 2008, 10:31 am

Post 19 May 2012, 10:23 am

No reason to discuss all that. England will fail once more :)
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 19 May 2012, 2:42 pm

Well, we can see why Cahill, Cole and even Lampard were in. I think they all played a blinder tonight for Chelsea.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 19 May 2012, 3:16 pm

Indeed. Unfortunately England are likely to go with Terry though.

Btw, how ridiculous was it that he weasled his way to the trophy presentation with his kit on, as if he'd played any part whatsoever in the outcome ?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 20 May 2012, 6:00 am

Well, he did play in quite a few of the games leading up to the final, if not the game itself. And he is club captain. I can't stand the guy, but I believe similar things happened in the past when the captain was not in a final.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 20 May 2012, 12:16 pm

The real reason Holt is sitting behind is because the FA has too much influence on player selcetions, suffering from tunnel vision to players from big teams.


You Don't think Roy is 100% clear to choose whomeever?
I do agree there's a mindset that sees the selection of players from the top 4.... Despite that, in some cases they are not integral to their teams success. Of course, on some teams English players are rare birds....
I wonder about the difference in level of play that you think there is between the EPL and International teams? I think that it could be argued that the filter that sees mostly international players on everyone of the PL teams, means that the level of play is consistently high. Even the lowest teams are capable, on the day, of performances that beat the top teams. In other European domestic leagues that doesn't happen. The bottom half are generally fodder for the top half and rarely pull upsets...(My impression, and that of a local soccer writer, so perhaps a careful analysis of results may prove me wrong...)
I realize its impossible to consider the situation of club teams versus nationals . They rarely play. I think Netherlands is playing Bayern Munich soon. so perhaps there is evidence for the idea that the very top club teams are better than many perhaps most national squads?

It is a whole different dynamic, tournament versus league, admittedly.
BTW, I've never seen Carroll as terribly good at holding up the ball and looking for, and finding support. Since I get the feeling the England striker will often be fairly detached from his mates, as the defend their half, if he's to be effective he'll need to do that. Holt was good at that this year. (Neither of the Defoe characters actor nor football player had that talent in spades either)
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 20 May 2012, 12:43 pm

Even the lowest teams are capable, on the day, of performances that beat the top teams. In other European domestic leagues that doesn't happen. The bottom half are generally fodder for the top half and rarely pull upsets...(My impression, and that of a local soccer writer, so perhaps a careful analysis of results may prove me wrong...)


This is a product of the Premier League financial model, where TV rights are distributed on a relatively equitable basis. Germany is similar, for similar reasons. In Spain and Italy the top teams get to negotiate individual tv deals and so they inevitably suck up vastly more money then their local competitors. This creates competitive imbalance.

The most successful sports leagues tend to operate on socialist principles of revenue sharing. I've always thought it richly ironic that the most perfect example of this is the NFL. If Karl Marx had designed a sports league he'd probably have come up with something not dissimilar, and yet it works incredibly well.