Jump to content

giggsy

SnowJapan Member
  • Content Count

    698
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by giggsy

  1.  Quote:
    Some English complaints should not have been aired at all. Eriksson persists in arguing that Sol Campbell's apparent winner in stoppage time ought to have stood, despite the photographic evidence of John Terry impeding the goalkeeper Ricardo with his left arm.
    Didn't see that. So it was invalid then??

    France out, they played crap as well...
  2. Thats right, sometimes people with opinions like that are simply not worth responding to.

     

    I'm actually on the police force (in the UK) and believe me, while it would be very nice to have peoples respect for what we do, I certainly lose no sleep over people with opinions like this "stripper on coke" character. It's just not worth it.

     

    Lets just hope that in any kind of emergency he remembers his opinions and refuses any police help......

  3. I thought we were pretty rubbish once again. We did not deserve to win. Becks should stand down. In fact, as my friend giggsgirl said, most of which I agree with....

     

    We need a new captain. That is not to scapegoat Becks because football players are only human and he has rescued England many more times than the few times he could be said to have `let England down`. Notice I say `he could be said to` because the errors he has made have been few and human.

     

    However, am I the only person who sees Becks as somebody who really has imposed too many burdens on himself by his lifestyle? Constant travelling to get more of that ever increasing mountain of money and satisfy his ego and that of his wife in seeing their faces plastered everywhere. I think it is arguable that he is not focused enough because he has tired himself from all his commercial activities. Ironically the captaincy made him worse because it gave him more opportunities to flog products - am I the only person who has distaste for his crass commercialism and overweening obsession with more, more money and publicity?

     

    Sven can do a Wenger and huff and puff about wet spots on the pitch but it didn`t stop other players. He needs to relieve Becks of the captaincy, get a player who doesn`t wear himself out money grubbing, and get somebody who knows he is a footballer first and rests accordingly. Get the captain`s role back to the player who regards travelling to get more money from sponsors and businesses all over the world as something that is irrelevant. There are a few outstanding England players who, while they make use of the commerical opportunities offered to them, do not let it rule their life.

     

    It is also clear to some of us that Madrid has not helped Beckham`s football. Despite all the propaganda his true skills have been under-utilised in Spain because he was surplus to requirements in the first place and had to play second fiddle regarding his role. It has also disrupted his private life and I think the strain is definitely showing.

     

    Is there anybody strong enought to stand up and say that Becks should step down as England captain? I wonder. Let`s not forget Peter Taylor`s motivation in the first place was less about football and more about helping Becks get over the World Cup sending off. Commendably charitable but not what football is about. So long as Becks is captain I don`t think England will win a tournament. Ignore this advice at your peril.

  4. Good game. Its good to see the team playing well. cool.gif

     

    On the subject of Beckham. He is actually looking noticeably "bigger" than he has in the past. And he basically peaked before his last year at United. His downhill started in his last year at Utd.....

  5. What do we want? A bit of style and a convincing win. Sorry, but it was a boring game - and we were playing against Switzerland (no offence, swissites, honest).

     

    Seems theres some sort of revolt over formation (or more) going on.

     

    ---------

     

    FOOTBALL: EURO 2004: ROW OVER DIAMOND EXPOSES A FLAW IN OUR CAMP GROUP B QUALIFIER: ENGLAND 3 SWITZERLAND 0, COIMBRA

     

    Oliver Holt

     

     

    AFTER the despair of the defeat to France, we had imagined that victory here against the Swiss would bring an explosion of relief and renewed optimism. Sorry. Not even close.

     

    Instead, this flattering 3-0 win over 10 men sent Sven Goran Eriksson and his England side back to their base outside Lisbon pursued by questions. A great big battalion of questions.

     

    It would be nice to know who is running the team, for a start. After 24 hours of confusion and talk of a successful player mutiny over tactics, that is no longer clear.

     

    Eriksson wanted to play a diamond formation. The players wanted to line up as a flat four. So they lined up as a flat four. But they still played like strangers, regardless of David Beckham's assertion after the game that player power was the catalyst of the victory.

     

    They stared at each other in irritation every time they wasted possession. Which was almost every time they had it. And in this stifling heat and cloying humidity, that was criminal.

     

    In midfield, in particular, confusion and much shrugging of shoulders reigned supreme. It stopped short of finger-pointing and recrimination but it wasn't far off.

     

    I admire Eriksson for his calmness and his ability to remove his ego from the job of managing a side but surely this was a step too far in bowing to player power. Unfairly blamed for handing victory to France on Sunday night, there are bound to be questions now about exactly what the manager does for his £3.5m salary if he does not even dictate team tactics.

     

    Before Wayne Rooney became the youngest ever player to score in the finals of the European Championship, England were in disarray.

     

    They scored against the run of play and then they restored a measure of order. But until Rooney grabbed his second goal 15 minutes from the final whistle, the outcome of the game was still in doubt.

     

    England go forward to Monday's game against Croatia probably needing only a draw to qualify for the quarter-finals and of course that is a reason to be cheerful.

     

    But Eriksson needs to restore direction to the side and the formation if they are to have a real shot at beating one of Spain, Greece or Portugal in the last eight.

     

    Of course, it is worth pointing out that one of Eriksson's strengths is that he listens to his players. That is one of the reasons they respect him.

     

    And if he had allowed himself to be overruled by them and their suggestions had proved an outstanding success, then he would have deserved to be praised for his wisdom.

     

    But last night was not an outstanding success. In honesty, it was closer to a shambles.

     

    Against a better team, against 11 men, you shudder to think what might have happened. Eriksson needs to re-assert his authority. He also needs to sort out his midfield.

     

    He needs to work out a better way of fitting Frank Lampard, Steven Gerrard and Paul Scholes into it because, at the moment, they are just not gelling.

     

    Of course, players who gave everything in heat that sucked the breath out of them deserve plenty of credit for squeezing past the Swiss and picking themselves up after Sunday's crushing setback in the Estadio da Luz. But let's be honest.

     

    This was a nervous, unconvincing victory over a desperately ordinary Switzerland side and England needed to ride their luck to achieve it.

     

    Most of all, though, it gave more credence to conspiracy theories that the influence of Eriksson in deciding the tactics of the side is not what it should be.

     

    It had been accepted for some time that the England manager was determined to play his midfield diamond system against the Swiss and that is how England lined up in training here in the Estadio Cidade de Coimbra on Wednesday evening.

     

    But yesterday morning, it emerged that the players had sent David Beckham and Gerrard to speak to coach Steve McClaren on Wednesday night.

     

    Eriksson had already gone to bed but they told McClaren they were not comfortable playing the diamond and asked if he would persuade Eriksson to revert to a flat back four. Eriksson listened to what McClaren had to say and England duly lined up with four across the middle and Scholes wide on the left rather than just behind the front two.

     

    But there are also concerns within the squad that playing a flat four across the midfield will quickly exhaust the quartet who have to press and chase throughout the game.

     

    Crucially, those concerns are being expressed by players considerably less influential than Beckham and Gerrard and appear to have been ignored.

     

    Beckham denied on Tuesday that he exerted any influence over tactics or team selection but the events of Wednesday night appear to disprove that yet again. Perhaps, between them, the senior players and Eriksson are edging towards a system that will suit all of them just as Bobby Robson and his squad did in Italy in 1990 when they disagreed about the shape of the back four.

     

    The players won that particular argument and the players appear to have won this one 14 years on, as well.

     

    But if player-power is to survive this tournament in the England camp, the players need to start flexing their muscles on the pitch as well as off it.

     

    Otherwise, the potential of a side from whom so much is still expected will disappear in the confusion of indecision that dominated this game last night.

×
×
  • Create New...