[Archived] Wilcox and Ripley, Sherwood England Caps

[chris]

Just wondering as I was a bit young, but Blackburn from 1992 to 1998 finsihed 4th,2nd, 1st Champions,7th Champions League season, 13th (Exclude this bump) and 6th.

two great wingers durring this period was Ripley and Wilcox. Our leader/captiain obviously Sherwood.

We have Flowers, Shearer, Le saux and Batty all regulars.

So why didn't these three players get caps regularly particularly between 93 and 96.

anyone know?

[LeChuck]

I think we're just so used to seeing English players at top sides play for England that it looks strange.

The simple answer is they just weren't as good as the competition.

It's quite weird to look back at some players like that actually. Steve Bruce never played a single game for England yet played over 300 games for Man Utd, becoming captain. Can you imagine the captain of Man Utd not playing for England nowadays?

Shows how much the game has changed that massively successful English players, title winning players, could afford to be overlooked. Not a chance of that now, perhaps due to the increased number of foreign players compared to that time.

[BRST]

Just wondering as I was a bit young, but Blackburn from 1992 to 1998 finsihed 4th,2nd, 1st Champions,7th Champions League season, 13th (Exclude this bump) and 6th.

two great wingers durring this period was Ripley and Wilcox. Our leader/captiain obviously Sherwwod.

We have Flowers, Shearer, Le saux and Batty all regulars.

So why didn't these three players get caps regularly particularly between 93 and 96.

anyone know?

In my opinion, Wilcox was very under-utilised at international level. I think we'd have won Euro 96 if he'd have gone. He was also unlucky with injuries.

Darren Anderton, McManaman and Steve Stone were used as wingers, and Ripley never really got a look in. He was also unlucky with injuries.

Gazza, Ince, David Platt and Batty (probably others too) were well ahead of Sherwood in the pecking order. I think I am right in saying, Sherwood was on the bench for England when the game with Ireland was abandoned in 1995?

[Presty On Tour]

I think in most of those years England played 3-5-2 with Le Saux and G.Neville used as wing backs.

Beckham, Mcmanaman(sp) and sicknote Anderton were always ahead of Wilcox and Ripley.

Sherwood didn't really get a look in past Scholes, Ince, Batty and Redknapp when fit. Also there was Gazza!!!!!

When it was 4-4-2, Stuart Pearce played at left back and Le Saux or Anderton/Mcmanaman/Redknapp on the left wing I believe.

[chris]

yeah they are some great players in midfield would explain it.

[McClarky]

You have to remember that in those days there were far more English players playing regularly in the League and so it was much harder to get into the England team. Look at the forwards in the mid 90s. Yoy had Shearer and Sherringham as first choice with Fowler, Ferdinand, Wright, Cole, Collymore, Sutton and probably some I have forgotton about as well. Any of these would walk into the current side.

[sleepyjack]

Looking back it's not easy to suggest any of the three deserved a starting spot at any point in their careers. Taylor's WC94 qualifying was dominated by a midfield of Platt, Ince, Carlton Palmer and Gazza. Barnes, Lee Sharpe, Nigel Clough and Paul Merson were all ahead of the Rovers midfielders in the pecking order. Ripley got his first cap in the 7-1 final qualifying game vs San Morino, then didn't play again until 1997, when he came on as a sub and immediately pulled a hamstring.

Between 94 and 96, Venables experimented with the team for a while, giving Le Saux a starting spot at LB and giving Batty a cap against Denmark. He kept Ince and Platt in the middle, and both were much better than Sherwood. After Darren Anderton became a permanant fixture, Barnes, Beardsley, Merson, Le Tissier and eventually McManaman all kept Ripley and Wilcox out. Wilcox got a game in a pre-Euro 96 friendly against Hungary but that was it for three years. By 1998 he wasn't even the best left winger at Rovers.

The following midfielders were selected for Euro 96: Ince, Platt, Gascoigne, Anderton, McManaman, Stone, Redknapp, Barmby. Every one of them under 30 and only Steve Stone could possibly have been left out. It's hard to see where you can fit any of those Rovers players in, really.

Beckham arrived immediately after Euro 96 and so Ripley didn't get another chance, probably rightly so given the talent ahead of him. Scholes and Butt came onto the international scene in 97 and so Sherwood didn't get a game until a Euro qualifier in 1999.

[rebelmswar]

Wilcox debut for England showed what he could do before he pulled up with an injury.

[BangkokRover]

Looking back it's not easy to suggest any of the three deserved a starting spot at any point in their careers. Taylor's WC94 qualifying was dominated by a midfield of Platt, Ince, Carlton Palmer and Gazza. Barnes, Lee Sharpe, Nigel Clough and Paul Merson were all ahead of the Rovers midfielders in the pecking order. Ripley got his first cap in the 7-1 final qualifying game vs San Morino, then didn't play again until 1997, when he came on as a sub and immediately pulled a hamstring.

I was working in Amsterdam at that time and I remember watching that game in an Irish pub. I was very happy for Super Stuart Ripley to be playing for England as his form for Rovers definitely deserved it. As sleepjack said he was only on the field for about 5 mins and then went off injured. Poor guy always had terrible luck in an England shirt.

[joey_big_nose]

It was interesting that Batty always got in while Sherwood was left out. I would say Sherwood was the better player personally although maybe a little less gritty in the tackle.

Not a Rover but it always totally bemused me that Le Tissier was constantly overlooked. After Gazzer he was easily the most talented Enlgish player of his generation but no England manager could figure him out. Aguably came ten years too early as today he would sit in that floating role behind the striker - a la Van Der Vaart, Modric, Nasri etc - really well.

Le Tissier and Shearer up front on form would have been a near ideal strike force - but there seemed to be little will to deploy anything other than two 'proper' strikers. Plus to be fair Sheringham was an excellent foil for Shearer.