The England thread

[Whisper]

Campbell is an awful choice to take, saw him up close at Sunderland about a week ago and he was fucking bollocks. Looked sluggish, made a lot of mistakes (even with basic passing) and when Kevin Kyle gets behind him you know there's a problem.

Jenas and Hargreaves are rubbish choices, neither are the type of players who can change a game, and neither will start, so what's the point? I guess its because they're apparently 'versatile', though Michael Owen could say he played left-back, wouldn't make him any good there. Nolan would have been a better choice, and Phil Neville (unlike Hargreaves) actually is a utility player, who's been impressive playing in the hole in a 4-5-1 as well.

I'm OK with Walcott, especially if Rooney and Owen are missing. He's a risk, sure, but he's someone who can get really run at defenders (unlike Crouch, Bent, Beattie or Ashton) and no one will have a clue who he is. Obviously Sven has been to the Arsenal training ground and seen something he likes.

As for Whisper's post, if Rooney and Owen aren't fit, they'll be replaced the day before by AJ or Defoe - its a preliminary squad at the minute. AJ has had an injury-plagued season and still scored goals, so no problem there, and although Defoe's form has been more-than patchy, he's still a goal threat.

Fair play to Sven, he's realised Rooney and Owen will probably miss out, and made a bold decision.

Andy Johnson shouldn't be anywhere near an England squad. Ever. Yeah he's scored goals... in the Championship. Players like Defoe and Bent are Premiership quality, Johnson isn't IMO. I'm well aware how many goals he scored last season but at least 30% of them were penalties. I would prefer any of Crouch, Bent, Defoe, Ashton, Beattie, Fowler or Harewood over him to tell the truth. Hell, if we have to go for Championship players, Leroy Lita has twice the ability AJ does.

And I don't see how anyone can complain about Crouch's inclusion. Alright so he isn't a goalscorer, but he's a good link up man and he's at the very least something different that we can bring on late in games.

[Asuka's Gonna Kill You]

Still wish they'd have taken Richardson over Bridge, just don't rate Bridge at all.

[Whisper]

I thought Richardson would make the back ups. There's no way he's a better full back than Bridge though.

Edited May 8, 2006 by Whisper in the Wind

[The Slickman]

I personally wouldve took Reo-Coker instead of Hargreaves

[Guest muddatrucker]

I don't see the massive problem with taking Walcott to be honest, it'd be good just to take such a massive risk hoping that he can be some kind of special weapon, but I agree that Defoe should definitely go, I think Walcott is purely a bad choice based on the fact that we'd only be taking 4 strikers, but if we'd taken more it wouldn't be much of a problem.

To me Crouch is a Plan B type player but its so obvious that Sven would start him alongside Owen if Rooney stays out and I think that'd be a bad choice.

But yeah, get Owen Hargreaves the fuck out, Jenas too.

[Liam]

Thats it though, Mudda, as you've pointed out. Theo Walcott + 3 other strikers doesn't make sense, especially when 2 are crocked (even if Rooney gets replaced, Owen is barely fit). If they'd taken 5, then I'd not be too fussed either.

[The Quasi Juice]

This is the preliminary squad so everything can change just like that guys. Here in Holland Marco Van Basten didn't have John Heitinga of Ajax in his preliminary squad and now suddenly he HAS been called up for Holland training so maybe Bent will still be called up.

When I look at this squad I think England can have a great first eleven but the rest really isn't good enough. Also, if Rooney doesn't come back fast or if it really shows Owen lacks match practice then England are screwed up front. Walcott is a fucking joke. He has played for Southampton who are in the Championship and that's it. Yeah he's 17 and billed the next Rooney or some crap like that (England likes to put over talents like they are god; Rooney is the new "Pele"....right) but he doesn't deserve to be in the England squad right now. Bent should have been in the squad because Bent played well the entire season. Crouch is what Vennegoor of Hesselink of PSV is in Holland. A tall guy who can hit a ball well with his head but here in Holland Vennegoor is being used as our 4th striker but Crouch will probably be used in the starting line-up. Crouch is alright to bring on the pitch in the dying moments of the second half but that's it. There are more in this squad that shouldn't go to the World Cup but quite frankly I don't mind 'cause that's less competition for us Dutchies

Edited May 8, 2006 by Chester

[marksbros6]

Can't BELIEVE some of these choices.

I actually don't mind Hargreaves, but he hasn't been near the squad in months, am I right? There is already enough versatility in the squad. Carrick can be the DMF, Lennon can cover both flanks and Carragher can play anywhere Hargreaves can and do a better job to boot IMO.

And Walcott? Someone who has yet to debut for his first Premier league club? When Darren Bent has scored so many goals this season and Jermain Defoe and Darius Vassel (proven England Goal-scorers) are left out? Don't get me wrong I always get behind the England team, and I hope the lad does well but it just seems bizarre. I can't remember the last tournament where we had an uncapped and untried player in the squad (though to be fair he does have a chance to make his debut in the upcoming friendlies).

I'd have left out Campbell, Walcott and Hargreaves and taken Wes Brown and Jermain Defoe and Darren Bent. Campbell hasn't impressed since his injury, and as I stated Hargreaves isn't needed with Carragher in the 23.

That way there would be two strikers with doubts over fitness (Rooney and Owen) Two proven England Goal-scorers (Crouch and Defoe- who IMO would compliment each other) as well as Bent (Who could try to convert his Premier goal tally into results at international level).

[therockbox]

So we're only taking four strikers, two of whom are unfit (and probably won't be fit by the tournament, either), another who isn't an out-and-out goalscorer, and another who hasn't even kicked a ball in the Premiership? Unbelievable.

Hargreaves and Jenas both being in is a fucking joke as well, they're both utter shyte and do absolutely nothing. Give me Phil Neville any day of the week. Get rid of those two clowns and stick Bent and Wright Phillips in.

EDIT: Isn't Jenas injured?

Edited May 8, 2006 by Codename V

[fineintent]

Chester, Crouch is pretty much useless with his head. His game is a link man, rather than an dominant aerial force - though he does really unsettle defenders with his height.

[marksbros6]

Jenas is recovering from a stress fracture of the shin I believe. Apparantly Reo-Coker is on standby to replace him according to the BBC website.

And i reckon if Rooney Isn't gonna recover, then they'd be best off taking Defoe. Are they allowed to call up Bent now he hasn't even been named as a reserve?

[Visionary]

Why in the hell is Rooney going at all? Owen may be fit so i may be able to forgive that but Rooney won't be until the final i believe i'm right in saying? If we get to the final are we honestly going to risk it be playing a un match fit Wayne Rooney when out strikers presumably have done a good job to get us to the final?

Sven has really let England down with this selection and lets just hope the squad for the world cup does change significantly.

[therockbox]

Normally I wouldn't wish an injury on any player, but I hope Jenas doesn't recover in time and has to replaced. I honestly think he's one of the most overrated players to ever play for England, I don't understand how you can justify his inclusion when he's done nothing major of note all season.

[Visionary]

Switching gears a little but i'd really like to see Carrick play in the centre alongside either Gerrard or Lampard because i believe he has the talent needed to replace either and let the other play their actual best game. I'm a huge Carrick fan.

[therockbox]

I reckon he'll play 4-5-1, which is why he's only taken four strikers. Carrick'll sit in the middle and allow Lampard and Gerrard to bomb forward.

[The One Bad Ass Outlaw]

What sheer idiocy.

Owen's not fit, Rooney's probably out for the whole thing, Peter Crouch is no more than a super-sub and Theo Walcott hasn't even proven himself at Premiership level yet. Owen Hargreaves is absolutely fucking useless, and Bent isn't even in the reserves. It's just moronic.

I would have taken five or six strikers, as if Walcott turns out to be crap then we're fucked. Crouch on his own up front? No thanks.

Johnson and Bent should've been in there instead of Hargreaves and Green (risky, but I doubt Robinson or James will ever get injured and suspended at the same time - if they do, just kneecap Crouch and bring Green in as his replacement) and Kevin Nolan should at least be on standby.

Looks like Sven's not really bothered now that he's out of a job come August.

[LexChaney]

Face it where Screwed in the world cup way worse than brett hart ever was (ok i now sound like Vince McMahon)

Anyway im praying that owen may be ok to play but he wont have That sharpness like the other players do, Rooney's going becuase he may be fit for later on in the World Cup, he isnt limping anymore.

Crouch why Take him...Take someone Bloody good i wouldnt mind if they took Robbie Fowler .

In all Fairness Walcott Isnt a Bad player But no way should he go to the world Cup saying that a lot of us Said this About Micheal Owen In 1998.

Hargreaves Isnt that bad when he comes on as sub, Sorry Cant see Us Winning.

Edited May 8, 2006 by Lex Luther

[Summers]

Crouch is good. Quiet you.

[Whisper]

Summers speaks the truth. Crouchie is immense.

[NobBe Nobbs]

The key difference between Owen and Walcott? Owen actually played a match before the World Cup - shock and summa dem mothafuckin' horror