The Final England Squad

[American]

By the way, adding to my earlier answer to Eddie's question, I think the one thing that this tournament will do is let us know how much influence a manager has on results. Argentina have more talent, but England have by far the superior manager in Capello. Wouldn't be shocked to see him get you at least to the semis.

[Clitherover]

Emile Heskey, why oh why? Surely his dreadful miss against the Japanese was enough to keep him well away from the final squad... The mind boggles.

[tcj_jones]

When you look at the winners of the various international tournaments, it isn't always about individual and collective talent. More often than not, it's the more conservative, defensive-minded teams who progress to latter stages at the expense of the more attacking, flamboyant sides with the world's best players. Sheer luck and a willing mentality also go a long way. Unfortunately, a winning mentality is the one quality England will never have, and luck always seems to abandon us at these competitions.

I agree with J_B_N that Joe Cole is a very important player for us, and I mentioned on another page how pleased I was that he was included. Other than Rooney, and maybe Lennon, he is the only player we have that really makes things happen. I expect yet another mediocre tournament from Gerrard and Lampard, so we need the likes of Cole to really perform.

We'll get to the semis, I'd bet a fair amount on that happening. However, we'll get absolutely dominated by Spain / Brazil and our midfield won't even see the ball as the likes of Xavi, Fabregas, Iniesta, Messi run rings around them.

England are functional and reasonably effective in winning matches unconvincingly. However, we've long lacked the skillful, flair players that are so numerous elsewhere in the world. I guess that stems back to youth football, however - a different topic altogether.

[Rovermatt]

I did...who went further again? I seem to recall them being knocked out in the last 16 by a France squad that I thought was quite decent and most didn't.

Indeed. England played perennial heavyweights Ecuador in the round of 16 didn't they? In any case the guts of that Spain side went onto win Euro 2008.

Argentina have Messi who stands alone, but after that they don't have many in that squad who can be labelled "ludicrously talented". The likes of Di Maria, Tevez, Higuain and Aguero are wonderful players, but are they any better than Gerrard, Lampard, Ferdinand, Cole or Terry?

Yes. You've left out the likes of Milito and Mascherano. If such individuals can't be termed as unbelievably talented, then I'm not sure who can. The Argies won't win it though (their qualifying campaign only underlines Maradona's level of ineptitude).

I would say that you are staunchly anti-English, not simply as a reaction to the general over-optimism that surrounds England in any major tournament, but more because you actually dislike them. Had England had a qualifying campaign that was anywhere near as disastrous as the one Argentina have just had then you would be dismissing any thought of them making it out of the group stage.

From a group including Algeria, USA and Slovenia? Hardly.

Anyway, I'm not the only person to have expressed apathy towards the team itself.

I don't see how going into this tournament you could sensibly argue that the England squad is significantly worse than the rest of the major nations. When you then combine that with a fairly straightforward group and the fact that they are on the "right" side of the draw as far as runs to the final go, then you have to give them a chance of winning.

I'm not arguing that they are 'significantly worse'. I'm simply disputing your claim that they have a superior squad to Argentina and Brazil.

Another untaxing group, a favourable side of the draw (very much in the same vein as the last World Cup), you are indeed correct. The English could go far. My point had nothing to do with this of course.

Edit- As an extra point: why are Brazil favourites? Is Kaka the only truly world class player in that bunch? Even he had a poor season if you want to apply the same standards that you do to the England team. Maicon maybe gets in? Dani Alves as a fullback who isn't that good defensively? They are capable of winning it, don't get me wrong (that's exactly why I think England can win it), but not may names in that 23 stand-out.

As I understand it from those in the know, Brazil are favourites because Dunga has melded a very effective unit. The flamboyance has been abandoned in favour of the aderence to the fundamentals that saw them sail through the merciless South American qualifying. Kaka is not the sole world class talent by any means. Maicon, Cesar, Lucio and even the much derided Alves (who hasn't done too badly for Barcelona) are all top players.

I can't see past the aforementioned Spain though.

[Rovermatt]

I'm not arguing that they are 'significantly worse'. I'm simply disputing your claim that they have a superior squad to Argentina and Brazil.

Apologies Eddie, you never claimed the above. What you said was:

I think you'd find it very difficult to argue that the current crop of players available to Holland, Brazil and Argentina are any better than those in the England squad

Not quite the same thing.

I still dispute it of course.

[Amo]

Darren Bent should have gone, without a doubt. He's scored 24 goals this season and barely been given a chance. If England are crying out for someone to score in the final minute, who would you pick - Bent or Heskey? (Rooney's n/a because he's already sent off)

[joey_big_nose]

I think you'd find it very difficult to argue that the current crop of players available to Holland, Brazil and Argentina are any better than those in the England squad. Spain are the standout side because of the amount of quality in their goal, midfield and up front, although I still think that they may have some defensive issues and they could face a very difficult run to the final. England have as good a chance as any and if they get the bit of luck that is necessary to win a cup then you never know and you can say exactly the same thing for 7/8 sides.

I simply don't agree with that. If you look at the front five for each you have

Holland:- v.Persie, Huntelaar, Sneijer, Robben, Van Der Vaart

Argentina:- Tevez, Messi, Melito, Mascherano, Veron

Brazil- Luis Fabiano, Robinho, Kaka, Melo, Elano/Gilberto Silva

There is bags of talent in there. Rooney and J Cole are the only two players we have who can match most of these guys technical ability.

Englad's lineup of Rooney, J Cole, Gerrard, Lampard, Milner/Lennon looks good but is severely hampered by Gerrard and Lampard not playing well at international level and J Cole just returning from injury. I just don't think there is enough indivudal talent in there to pull us through, plus we have too many players wanting to play in the same area of the pitch (that hole behind the forward) whereas the Dutch, Brazil and Argentina have a much more balanced forward line.

And while England have arguably one of the best defences in the tournament that is somewhat undermined by having a terrible choice of keepers

[Stuart]

Trouble is Bent has never "done it" for England. Heskey has. (In terms of what they are expected to contribute).

Heskey is an excellent foil for Rooney, whereas Crouch pretty much marginalises him.

I get the impression that Capello is looking for a strong team unit. Bent just doesn't look like he fits in.

I can see your point though Topman. It looks like we are sticking with plan A at the expense of having someone to change a game. A reason I thought Adam Johnson might have made the cut. Hopefully Joe Cole will stay fit enough to do the same.

At what point do we start to guess first XI and formations?

[Amo]

Trouble is Bent has never "done it" for England. Heskey has. (In terms of what they are expected to contribute).

Bent has been given two sparing appearances to prove himself this year.

People can say Heskey is a target man and not necessarily a goalscorer (that's an understatement), but even John Carew's goalscoring record is better than Heskey's, playing in a weaker international side. Heskey hasn't got any goals in him and that has to be a major concern at this tournament.

[thenodrog]

I agree with J_B_N that Joe Cole is a very important player for us, and I mentioned on another page how pleased I was that he was included. Other than Rooney, and maybe Lennon, he is the only player we have that really makes things happen. I expect yet another mediocre tournament from Gerrard and Lampard, so we need the likes of Cole to really perform.

Correct. I'd have omitted one of Lampard / Gerrard from the final squad. I'd have told em from the off that I was going to too in order to see who reacted best. The other would have been sitting on the subs bench most of the time.

[thenodrog]

When will we learn?!

At least six teams out there who are better on paper that us (Spain, Argentina, Brazil, Holland, Portugal, Italy) plus the Germans who always perform above their talents, and the French who are a bit of a dark horse. Quarter finals would be a good tournament in my book, Semis would be excellent.

We just don't have enough first rate players at international level - Rooney is brilliant, our defence is very good, but apart from that we are pretty average. Gerrard and Lampard have never really done it for England, we lack width and penetration and play too much through the middle. To make an impression we are going to need J Cole to have a very good tournament imo as he is the only player apart from Rooney who can make things happen. Crouch's goalscoring form will also be key.

When you look at the galaxy of talent avalable to the likes of Holland, Spain, Brazil and Argentina it is hard to take any notion of England wining the Cup seriously.

Correct JBN. We are bereft of quality right down the spine of the team.

1. Average keepers...... and I'm being kind.

2. Injury prone, aged and out of form centre halves.

3. A central midfield that cannot play together and never could. A situation engineered years ago by national press and weak national managment. Our best international midfielder will no doubt be stuck out on the left wing whilst the Billy Big Times will be holding hands and watching the game pass em by as usual.

4. Not one centre forward that stands out as top drawer. Crouch is best but he can't get a regular run out for Spurs.

5. As usual we are pinning almost our entire hopes on the excellent Wayne Rooney.

Dont be fooled into buying expensive telly's folks!

[LeChuck]

Darren Bent should have gone, without a doubt. He's scored 24 goals this season and barely been given a chance. If England are crying out for someone to score in the final minute, who would you pick - Bent or Heskey? (Rooney's n/a because he's already sent off)

You've missed out Defoe and Crouch though, and that's Bent's problem.

If we did need a goal in the last minute, I'd pick Crouch and Defoe ahead of Bent every time, they're both proven to be very effective from the bench for England.

Heskey is in the squad for entirely different reasons, it's not a fair comparison. If we were trying to protect a 1-0 lead going into the last five minutes of a game, then I'd want Heskey ahead of Bent.

Bent just doesn't fit anywhere. It is a little bit unfortunate, but then he's done sod all in his six caps so far.

[BuckyRover]

Bent's attitude stinks. He can't cope when he is not the top dog. His contrasting fortunes at all his clubs allude to this.

He hadn't been picked by Sven, McClaren or Capello. Highlighting to me, that even an idiot wouldn't pick him.

You can keep shouting "24 goals" if it makes you feel any better.

Another point, do you think Warnock might have been included as cover for Barry? I might bet on him starting in midfield against the USA, could be good odds.

[laughatthedingles]

Squad numbers:

1. Green

2. Johnson

3. A Cole

4. Barry

5. Ferdinand

6. Terry

7. J Cole

8. Lampard

9. Crouch

10. Rooney

11. Gerrard

12. James

13. Hart

14. Carragher

15. King

16. Milner

17. Carrick

18. Heskey

19. Lennon

20. Upson

21. Warnock

22. Defoe

23. Wright-Phillips

[JAL]

Bent's attitude stinks. He can't cope when he is not the top dog. His contrasting fortunes at all his clubs allude to this.

He hadn't been picked by Sven, McClaren or Capello. Highlighting to me, that even an idiot wouldn't pick him.

You can keep shouting "24 goals" if it makes you feel any better.

Another point, do you think Warnock might have been included as cover for Barry? I might bet on him starting in midfield against the USA, could be good odds.

You have to ask if Darren Bent was that good then why did Tottenham offload him to Sunderland and after he'd gone Spurs then improved their league position.

[LeChuck]

Squad numbers:

1. Green

2. Johnson

3. A Cole

4. Barry

5. Ferdinand

6. Terry

7. J Cole

8. Lampard

9. Crouch

10. Rooney

11. Gerrard

Interesting, if 1-11 can assumed to be first choice then it's going to be a very narrow midfield.

Lennon is surely a starter on the right though? Put him instead of Crouch and I'd be very happy with that as the strongest team.

I thought James was going to be number one as well, but it looks like it's Green.

[Amo]

You've missed out Defoe and Crouch though, and that's Bent's problem.

If we did need a goal in the last minute, I'd pick Crouch and Defoe ahead of Bent every time, they're both proven to be very effective from the bench for England.

Heskey is in the squad for entirely different reasons, it's not a fair comparison. If we were trying to protect a 1-0 lead going into the last five minutes of a game, then I'd want Heskey ahead of Bent.

Bent just doesn't fit anywhere. It is a little bit unfortunate, but then he's done sod all in his six caps so far.

Easy way to sidestep the question there. Let's say Bent was playing ahead of Crouch/Defoe etc. you'd still back him to score over Emile Heskey. Capello said he would back players on form for their clubs, yet gives Bent a paltry two appearances to prove himself and pursues with the lumbering Heskey. Bent fits into the squad in the sense that he's a goalscorer, and you can never have enough of those at international level. And if we're talking about target men, then Crouch plays that role far more effectively than Heskey and actually poses a goal threat.

You have to ask if Darren Bent was that good then why did Tottenham offload him to Sunderland and after he'd gone Spurs then improved their league position.

You're not serious, are you?

[LeChuck]

Easy way to sidestep the question there. Let's say Bent was playing ahead of Crouch/Defoe etc. you'd still back him to score over Emile Heskey. Capello said he would back players on form for their clubs, yet gives Bent a paltry two appearances to prove himself and pursues with the lumbering Heskey. Bent fits into the squad in the sense that he's a goalscorer, and you can never have enough of those at international level. And if we're talking about target men, then Crouch plays that role far more effectively than Heskey and actually poses a goal threat.

Heskey's not in the squad to be a goalscorer though. I know that sounds a bit weird for a striker, but we do often look a better team with him on the field.

I honestly didn't intend to sidestep the question by including Crouch and Defoe; I think they're key to it. When would Bent ever get on the field? He's behind those two in the pecking order for 'impact' striker, and he doesn't do the defensive/target man stuff that Heskey does.

To answer the hypothetical question - of course I'd back Bent over Heskey in front of goal. But in reality Defoe and Crouch are going to be on the field ahead of Bent, so that situation will never happen. Heskey won't be brought on to score a goal.

If Bent went instead of Heskey he wouldn't have got a game unless we had an injury crisis. Even though Heskey offers little threat in front goal, there are situations where he could be useful - protecting a lead, giving Rooney someone to play off. Bent would be overlooked for Defoe and Crouch if we wanted a goalscorer, and he doesn't really offer anything else.

I know Capello said about the club form thing, but you could argue that Heskey and Bent were never competing, they're totally different players, almost a different position. Bent was probably competing with Defoe. Carlton Cole is probably the only alternative we've got to Heskey but he was unfortunately injured for a lot of last season.

[Billy Castell]

If Heskey is there to run around and be a physical presence, then why doesn't Capello try to see if Vanikolo or Tom Varndell are bored of rugby and fancy a crack? Both are fast, strong, and are probably better in front of goal.

[BuckyRover]

Easy way to sidestep the question there. Let's say Bent was playing ahead of Crouch/Defoe etc. you'd still back him to score over Emile Heskey. Capello said he would back players on form for their clubs, yet gives Bent a paltry two appearances to prove himself and pursues with the lumbering Heskey. Bent fits into the squad in the sense that he's a goalscorer, and you can never have enough of those at international level. And if we're talking about target men, then Crouch plays that role far more effectively than Heskey and actually poses a goal threat.

You're not serious, are you?

His attitude and his demeanour. He only did well at Spirs when Keane/Defoe were injured (or at other clubs). As soon as there is competition for places he loses his mettle. After missing that chance for Spurs (the one Harry's grandma could have scored), the writing was already on the wall.

Phillips, Stewart, Ricketts, Andy Cole all scored for fun in the premiership (Ricketts and scored for fun might not be totally accurate, but I'm going with it), but couldn't cut it at international level. I will even go so far as to say that I reckon the next England manager will give him a go and he will again not take his chance, because he lacks the mental strength.

Then again, maybe you are correct, and know more about Bent than somebody who has seen him train and Capello is in fact a very well paid idiot.

[RoyRover]

I think you'd find it very difficult to argue that the current crop of players available to Holland, Brazil and Argentina are any better than those in the England squad. Spain are the standout side because of the amount of quality in their goal, midfield and up front, although I still think that they may have some defensive issues and they could face a very difficult run to the final. England have as good a chance as any and if they get the bit of luck that is necessary to win a cup then you never know and you can say exactly the same thing for 7/8 sides.

I did...who went further again? I seem to recall them being knocked out in the last 16 by a France squad that I thought was quite decent and most didn't.

Argentina have Messi who stands alone, but after that they don't have many in that squad who can be labelled "ludicrously talented". The likes of Di Maria, Tevez, Higuain and Aguero are wonderful players, but are they any better than Gerrard, Lampard, Ferdinand, Cole or Terry? In all likelihood you will see far more of the English players and scrutinise them far more than their foreign counterparts. The main problem with assessing England's talent is that three of their best players are defenders (I would argue that Terry, Ferdinand and Cole would all enter the debate for being in the group of best players in the world for their respective positions) and that Gerrard and Lampard have typically underperformed for England (although that doesn't mean that they aren't World Class players, which you certainly can't argue based on their club form, especially not with Lampard this season).

I would say that you are staunchly anti-English, not simply as a reaction to the general over-optimism that surrounds England in any major tournament, but more because you actually dislike them. Had England had a qualifying campaign that was anywhere near as disastrous as the one Argentina have just had then you would be dismissing any thought of them making it out of the group stage.

I don't see how going into this tournament you could sensibly argue that the England squad is significantly worse than the rest of the major nations. When you then combine that with a fairly straightforward group and the fact that they are on the "right" side of the draw as far as runs to the final go, then you have to give them a chance of winning. I won't be putting money on it and I'm not preparing to sew a second star onto my shirt, but it's the best chance an England team has had in my lifetime.

Edit- As an extra point: why are Brazil favourites? Is Kaka the only truly world class player in that bunch? Even he had a poor season if you want to apply the same standards that you do to the England team. Maicon maybe gets in? Dani Alves as a fullback who isn't that good defensively? They are capable of winning it, don't get me wrong (that's exactly why I think England can win it), but not may names in that 23 stand-out.

I think most fans (including many of the England fans who have responded to your posts) could very easily argue that Holland, Brazil and Argentina have a better set of players than England. Before the last World Cup, we were bombarded with how the England team were in the best position to ever win the World Cup because all of their best players, apart from Rooney, were at their prime in terms of age and form. They were totally hopeless and their performance at the finals was an embarrassment to the expectations that were rightly place upon them. Four years on and we are looking at team that still relies on the same faces that failed so badly at the World Cup in 2006 and failed to qualify for the European Championships. What England do have going for them is their manager and the magnificent Wayne Rooney. What Capello managed to do in England's qualifying games is convincingly beat the teams that England should be crushing anyway. He gave them more freedom and confidence to go out and play and not struggle against teams like Andorra and Croatia. And then there is Wayne Rooney, who is so much better than anyone else on the England team, that it doesn't seem fair. The guy is totally brilliant and the expectation on him is unfair, because he is the only one who can be expected to deliver at the very highest level.

That is where the difference lies compared to other teams. The likes of Argentina and Holland have a whole host of players who are at the top of their game. England have one superstar who has just come off a magnificent season with Manchester United. Steven Gerard has had a poor season with Liverpool and has never really done it on the international stage. Frank Lampard had a great season with Chelsea, but like Gerard has never really been as good for England. Moreover the two of them can't play together. The you look at the some of the other attacking players, like Lennon who missed more or less the entire second half of the season, or Joe Cole and Shaun Wright-Phillips who've been bit part players for their teams this season.

What may be seen as anti-English, may just be confused for peoples utter frustration at putting a pretty average team up against the best teams and players in the world. There's nothing wrong with supporting your country and wanting them to do well at the World Cup. It's what the whole thing is about. But there's also no shame in realising a teams limitations and knowing that there are teams who are better than them. I doubt too many people will be arranging a witch hunt if a fan were to concede that England are a level below the elite teams and sit along side the likes of France, Portugal, Ivory Coast, Serbia, Italy and Mexico in world football. I do agree with you, that England are probably one of seven or eight teams who could win the World Cup, but they would be toward the bottom of that list. As Paul Hayward wrote in the Observer Sport on Sunday, it would take an England fan of monumental blindness to imagine that England go to the World Cup with the best set of players.

[thenodrog]

Heskey is much more use than Bent. He can play the back to goal stuff and preoccupy centre halves much better. Bent's style does not really suit the England set up and he would just get under Rooney's feet.

BUT personally speaking the choice for me would have been Kevin Davies over the pair of them..... A lot on here will disagree of course but I'd wager none would who play centre half in the prem.

[BuckyRover]

I also just remembered that he missed two penalties against Spurs, I assume he would have desperate to score a hat trick against them but he couldn't do it.

I would hate to have seen him presented with a guilt edged chance in the latter stages of the WC because I have a very good image of what would happen.

He is a very good mid table Premiership player. Why aren't the big boys after him if he's that good? Wouldn't be too hard to persuade him to leave Sunderland....

[joey_big_nose]

Heskey is much more use than Bent. He can play the back to goal stuff and preoccupy centre halves much better. Bent's style does not really suit the England set up and he would just get under Rooney's feet.

BUT personally speaking the choice for me would have been Kevin Davies over the pair of them..... A lot on here will disagree of course but I'd wager none would who play centre half in the prem.

There is a very strong argument that whatever Heskey can offer the England team Davies can offer more. Emile used to have pace but now that has gone.

Looking at the squad numbers it seems pretty straight forward selection perhaps with, as Le Chuck says, Crouch out and Lennon in.

Thing is Crouch scores goals - an impressive amount of them - and looks a much better player on the international stage than at club level. On paper it is incredibly difficult to justify leaving him out.

To be honest in terms of winning games I would be tempted to play both Lennon and Crouch and leave one of Gerrard or Lampard on the bench. It would take balls to do that but in my book it makes a lot of sense. We have too many cooks in the same area of the pitch when Lampard, Gerrard, Rooney and J Cole play.

[Drummer Boy]

I'm pleased to see Warnock get the nod - he deserved his chance whilst with us, but the FA policy since 1996 of not picking BRFC players until they've left probably did for that