[Archived] European Championship France 2016

[Gav]

Maradona was a fantastic player, probably the best player ever until Messi came along, but how do you define greatness?

What singles Maradona out was the fact he did it in Spain and Italy at club level and won world cups with his national side. But i think him carrying Napoli to the Seria A title was probably his best achievement.

He did all this in the days when players of his caliber got kicked from pillar to post and had very little protection from the refs, yet he got up and carried on week in week out, great player.

[speeeeeeedie]

First of all you brought up 94 not me, that wasn't our best side but it was still better than our current crop, the 96 squad was better and 98/2000'ish was the last very good side.

Stuart Pearce was ok? Paul Ince was ok? Des Walker was average? David Platt ok?

Sorry Joey but you're talking bunkum pal, in my opinion of course.

I'm with Joey. England has a better crop of strikers now than it did in the 90's post Lineker's retirement. The rest of the squad is improving too.

Ian Wright and Les Ferdinand were very good club strikers but couldn't cut it at international level. Neither could Andy Cole. Robbie Fowler was mercurial, a real goal scorer, but his game wasn't set up for international football either.

Shearer was our best but didn't play on crucial qualifiers in 1993 when he was out with the knee injury he got just before Christmas. In that time they drew at home to Holland after being 2-0 up and got creamed 2-0 in Norway after a shocking performance. 4 points from those 2 games instead of 1 would have seen us qualify. He was back for the robbery in Rotterdam, but the damage was done earlier.

David Platt was that generation's Lampard. Didn't do much but managed to bag a goal or 2. I was never impressed with him.

Ince was good as was Des Walker. Pearce was solid yet not as good as Ashley Cole. Unless Shaw comes back from injury and lives up to his hype we will struggle at left back for years, an area which ahs been very dependable over the last 30 or so years (pretty much Sansom to Pearce to Cole).

I always thought that our central defensive choices in the 1990's to the Sven era was miles better than it is now.

[speeeeeeedie]

Maradona was a fantastic player, probably the best player ever until Messi came along, but how do you define greatness?

What singles Maradona out was the fact he did it in Spain and Italy at club level and won world cups with his national side. But i think him carrying Napoli to the Seria A title was probably his best achievement.

He did all this in the days when players of his caliber got kicked from pillar to post and had very little protection from the refs, yet he got up and carried on week in week out, great player.

Maradona was out of this world. As is Messi.

So far Messi has outshined Maradona with his club feats but if you are from Argentina you'd plum for Maradona every time as he won them the World Cup. Messi got to the final but Di Maria was their star man.

[Gav]

Shearer was the best English striker I've ever seen, better than Rooney, better than Kane and Wright and Ferdinand played bit parts, never first choice strikers.

But I think the points getting clouded somewhat, we're not talking about strikers, we're talking about England sides, and I believe that any full strength England side from back in the 90's would have wiped the floor with the current side.

Maradona was out of this world. As is Messi.

So far Messi has outshined Maradona with his club feats but if you are from Argentina you'd plum for Maradona every time as he won them the World Cup. Messi got to the final but Di Maria was their star man.

Messi has been and still is surrounded by world class players at club and international level.

Look at the Napoli side Maradona carried to 2 titles in 80's, hardly any household names, thats the difference for me.

[TeamGB-11]

Maradona was out of this world. As is Messi.

So far Messi has outshined Maradona with his club feats but if you are from Argentina you'd plum for Maradona every time as he won them the World Cup. Messi got to the final but Di Maria was their star man.

My work is done here..

Shearer was the best English striker I've ever seen, better than Rooney, better than Kane and Wright and Ferdinand played bit parts, never first choice strikers.

But I think the points getting clouded somewhat, we're not talking about strikers, we're talking about England sides, and I believe that any full strength England side from back in the 90's would have wiped the floor with the current side.

Messi has been and still is surrounded by world class players at club and international level.

Look at the Napoli side Maradona carried to 2 titles in 80's, hardly any household names, thats the difference for me.

It gets better..

[K-Hod]

My work is done here..

It gets better..

Nobody likes a show-off.

[TeamGB-11]

Nobody likes a show-off.

I'm a very self depreciating character in real life..

[McClarky]

I like big tournaments to be honest. Small nations like wales and NI are normally locked out, and this will give them a chance, and there will be upsets. It won't be a procession of the big teams through, theyll be a surprise or two, there always is.

Don't really see the downside to a 24 team tournament, its just one extra knockout round. What's the big deal?

The downside for me is that I t is too easy to qualify for the finals and when you get there it's too easy to get through the group stage. Even after a couple of weeks of games there will have been little or no good games because there's too many teams there. Even 16 is a lot for this but 24? It should be an honour and an achievement to qualify.

[TeamGB-11]

The downside for me is that I t is too easy to qualify for the finals and when you get there it's too easy to get through the group stage. Even after a couple of weeks of games there will have been little or no good games because there's too many teams there. Even 16 is a lot for this but 24? It should be an honour and an achievement to qualify.

Wales and northern Ireland would still have been there under the 16 team set up as they finished top 2. Republic of ireland would be out I'd guess..

[speeeeeeedie]

Shearer was the best English striker I've ever seen, better than Rooney, better than Kane and Wright and Ferdinand played bit parts, never first choice strikers.

But I think the points getting clouded somewhat, we're not talking about strikers, we're talking about England sides, and I believe that any full strength England side from back in the 90's would have wiped the floor with the current side.

I agree with you on Shearer, but Ferdinand and Ian Wright played a good few games for England. I doubt that Ings and Vardy will.

To your other point I would probably agree too. We were a whisker away from 1994 qualification. Graham Taylor wasn't our greatest manager but we had a decent squad. Euro 1996 was a joy to watch, and we were hard done by in 1998, even after finishing 2nd in the group thanks to Seaman and LeSaux cocking it up against Romania.

Whatever back 4 ends up starting in France next year won't be able to hold a candle to any of the below*.

England team v Holland WCQ 1993

Seaman David, Parker Paul, Adams Anthony, Pallister Gary, Dorigo Anthony, Palmer Carlton, Platt David©, Ince Paul, Sharp Lee, Merson Paul, Shearer Alan

England team v Holland Euro 1996;

Seaman David, Neville Gary, Adams Anthony ©, Southgate Gareth, Pearce Stuart, Gascoigne Paul, Anderton Darren, Ince Paul, McManaman Steve, Sheringham Teddy, Shearer Alan

England team v Argentina WC 1998

Seaman David, Neville Gary, Adams Anthony ©, Campbell Sol, LeSaux Graeme, Beckham David, Anderton Darren, Ince Paul, Scholes Paul, Owen Michael, Shearer Alan

I think the 1998 team was the best of the 3.

*Edit; subs in 1998 included Rio Ferdinand, Martin Keown, and Gareth Southgate.

[joey_big_nose]

First of all you brought up 94 not me, that wasn't our best side but it was still better than our current crop, the 96 squad was better and 98/2000'ish was the last very good side.

Stuart Pearce was ok? Paul Ince was ok? Des Walker was average? David Platt ok?

Sorry Joey but you're talking bunkum pal, in my opinion of course.

It's funny you say we were good in 2000 cause we bombed out of the Euros at the group stage, losing out in our group to Portugal and Romania to similar wails of derision that followed our exit in last year's world cup.

I think there is always this thing about England where we either have to be terrible or brilliant. But to be honest I don't see that much difference between this squad and any from the last 25 years. It's okay. Could do well. Is not going to win.

While we only have two established international players today - Rooney and Hart - compared to say the 2006 team which had eight or nine theoretically top european players, most of whom won the European Cup with their clubs, (Beckham, Ashley Cole, Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney, Ferdinand, Terry, G Neville, Scholes) who were expected to do well. However the balance of that team was never right and we never played better than average in 2006, and we embarassingly failed to even bloody qualify (again!) in 2008 with this "golden generation".

It's not a modern thing-we were average or worse in 1994, 92, 88 (Platt, Waddle, Barnes, Hoddle, Lineker etc theoretical peak - the "great players" of yesteryear - finishing humiliated, pointless and bottom of their group behind the ROI, Soviet Union and Netherlands) 84. We had solid showings in the 82 and 86 world cup similar to the 98 and 2002 efforts where we acquitted ourselves well but then got beat by frankly better teams.

I don't see any great decline in English football just a consistent averageness. And while our midfield and defence look very shaky at the moment we do have a higher standard and depth of pacy technical forwards than we have in the past - the sort of players we have rarely produced before and suffered for it.

[speeeeeeedie]

It's funny you say we were good in 2000 cause we bombed out of the Euros at the group stage, losing out in our group to Portugal and Romania to similar wails of derision that followed our exit in last year's world cup.

I think there is always this thing about England where we either have to be terrible or brilliant. But to be honest I don't see that much difference between this squad and any from the last 25 years. It's okay. Could do well. Is not going to win.

While we only have two established international players today - Rooney and Hart - compared to say the 2006 team which had eight or nine theoretically top european players, most of whom won the European Cup with their clubs, (Beckham, Ashley Cole, Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney, Ferdinand, Terry, G Neville, Scholes) who were expected to do well. However the balance of that team was never right and we never played better than average in 2006, and we embarassingly failed to even bloody qualify (again!) in 2008 with this "golden generation".

It's not a modern thing-we were average or worse in 1994, 92, 88 (Platt, Waddle, Barnes, Hoddle, Lineker etc theoretical peak - the "great players" of yesteryear - finishing humiliated, pointless and bottom of their group behind the ROI, Soviet Union and Netherlands) 84. We had solid showings in the 82 and 86 world cup similar to the 98 and 2002 efforts where we acquitted ourselves well but then got beat by frankly better teams.

I don't see any great decline in English football just a consistent averageness. And while our midfield and defence look very shaky at the moment we do have a higher standard and depth of pacy technical forwards than we have in the past - the sort of players we have rarely produced before and suffered for it.

Gav stated that the current England team would be easily beaten by previous England teams. He wasn't really commenting on whether prior teams were any good or not.

I agree with him that those teams would probably beat todays team. I agree with you in that I think we have a better stable of strikers than we used to.

England 2006 should have done better. We were undone on penalties by a talented Portugal side after Rooney got himself sent off. However, they had the talent to do much better.

At the time English teams were riding high in the Champs League; Liverpool won in in 05. Arsenal lost in 06. Liverpool lost in 07. An all English final saw United beat Chelsea in 08. Then United got beat off Barcelona in 09. That is pretty impressive yet I think that this hurt the England team.

There were far too many factions in the squad. The Man U, Liverpool, and London lads all kept their own counsel. Beckham and Owen tried to act as ambassadors, but Owen got injured in the first game and was gone.

[TeamGB-11]

Hodgson got Fulham to the uefa cup final. He's very good at squeezing quality from mediocrity. Clint Dempsey looked a class goalscoring midfielder under his management, but he soon dropped back into mediocrity when he moved onto spurs, exposing his limitations. Hodgson is our ace in the pack for me. The man knows what he's doing, esp in the European game.

[K-Hod]

Whatever anyone says about Hodgson, you can't fault 10 wins out of 10!

[Baz]

Hodgson got Fulham to the uefa cup final. He's very good at squeezing quality from mediocrity. Clint Dempsey looked a class goalscoring midfielder under his management, but he soon dropped back into mediocrity when he moved onto spurs, exposing his limitations. Hodgson is our ace in the pack for me. The man knows what he's doing, esp in the European game.

Did you watch the world cup? An easy group has done us no favours whatsoever, the next 4 games will show how far we have progressed from that shambles, my guess is that we haven't, but I hope to be proven wrong.

[Gav]

Hodgson got Fulham to the uefa cup final. He's very good at squeezing quality from mediocrity. Clint Dempsey looked a class goalscoring midfielder under his management, but he soon dropped back into mediocrity when he moved onto spurs, exposing his limitations. Hodgson is our ace in the pack for me. The man knows what he's doing, esp in the European game.

Well he failed miserably in Brazil, not his fault though the players are cr@p.

We'll be home from France before the ink drys on your Euro 2016 wall chart, mark my words

[DE.]

2004 - 2006 was when the 'modern' England team were at their peak, imo. Perhaps with a little more luck we would have made it to the final.

Since then it's been absolutely dire as far as tournaments go. Not qualifying for 2008, the borefest that was 2010, the painstaking averageness of 2012 and then bombing out of 2014.

We'll be lucky to make it past the group stages again in this tournament. Our front line is woeful, and Rooney in particular is a shadow of his former self.

Hopefully after Euro 2016 we bring in a younger manager with some fresh ideas. Roy won't get us very far, even if we have won 10 out of 10 in what must have been the easiest group of the qualifying stages.

[roverandout]

First of all you brought up 94 not me, that wasn't our best side but it was still better than our current crop, the 96 squad was better and 98/2000'ish was the last very good side.

Stuart Pearce was ok? Paul Ince was ok? Des Walker was average? David Platt ok?

Sorry Joey but you're talking bunkum pal, in my opinion of course.

Euro 2004/2006 was our best side, some of the best defenders in the world, Terry, Campbell, Ferdinand, a fantastic midfield on paper, scholes,/lampard/Beckham/Gerrard and Owen and Rooney up front but a @#/? goalkeeper, if we had Hart in that team we would have won euro 2004

As for this team we have some very talented youngsters coming through, if we can get sturridge fit, we should be building the team around him not rooney

[Audax]

Those groups balance out DE; hard to say one group was easier, don't people say that every time?

Netherlands totally misses the Euro, they miss a major tournament I'd say about every 15 years.

Some groups were tougher but I'd say a few look as if they have a similar calibre to England's group, Switzerland granted, have been a better team these past 5 years.

http://uk.soccerway.com/international/europe/european-championship-qualification/2016-france/qualifying-round/r24218/

[joey_big_nose]

Euro 2004/2006 was our best side, some of the best defenders in the world, Terry, Campbell, Ferdinand, a fantastic midfield on paper, scholes,/lampard/Beckham/Gerrard and Owen and Rooney up front but a @#/? goalkeeper, if we had Hart in that team we would have won euro 2004

As for this team we have some very talented youngsters coming through, if we can get sturridge fit, we should be building the team around him not rooney

I don't really agree with this. We had that 2004/2006 team together for several years and it never looked that good. Lots of excellent individual player but they didn't work well together as a unit. Too many attacking central players, not enough wide (particularly left wingers) or defensive midfield players. Plus Owen burned out very quickly while Shearer and Sheringham retired leaving us with only Rooney backed up by average strikers like Crouch and Defoe. We never looked like winning anything.

Germany now, Spain in 2010, France in 98 are/were great teams as they have good balance, shape and system as well as individual talent. We've never managed that except for a few brief weeks in 90, 96 (the genius of the Christmas tree!) and 98.

I suppose what I'm saying is we don't have as many established players as before, however we do have very fast flexible attackers who can interchange positions very easily, and this allows us to play a more dangerous style of international football. Also we are not trying to shoe horn lots of similar players into the team (as we were with Gerrard, Lampard, Scholes and Joe Cole - all of whom liked to play behind the striker, and all of whom lacked pace)

I think we will continue to do better than people expect as has happened in the qualifying group. We should match out "normal" achievement of first or second knockout round but then get well beaten by Germany, Spain, or be shaded out by the likes of Portugal, Italy or France. Which is really not any different to any side Engalnd has produced since the eighties (90, 96 and, to an extent, 98 excepted).

[joey_big_nose]

Those groups balance out DE; hard to say one group was easier, don't people say that every time?

Netherlands totally misses the Euro, they miss a major tournament I'd say about every 15 years.

Some groups were tougher but I'd say a few look as if they have a similar calibre to England's group, Switzerland granted, have been a better team these past 5 years.

http://uk.soccerway.com/international/europe/european-championship-qualification/2016-france/qualifying-round/r24218/

Wow. For the Netherlands to finish 4th in that group is a huge shock! In the humiliation stakes right up their with Englands worst failures.

We had harder opposition in our group than any of theirs - Switzerland (who our "shyte" team beat easily twice) but they did have a much stiffer second team in Czech. Apart from Switzerland our group was terrible.

[TeamGB-11]

Wow. For the Netherlands to finish 4th in that group is a huge shock! In the humiliation stakes right up their with Englands worst failures.

We had harder opposition in our group than any of theirs - Switzerland (who our "shyte" team beat easily twice) but they did have a much stiffer second team in Czech. Apart from Switzerland our group was terrible.

Slovenia qualified as group winners for the last tournament and were viewed as an up and coming force..

[Gav]

England should have won the world cup in 1990 and the Euros in 96, I also felt we had a good chance in France 98, if Campbells header against Argentina had been given who knows, but we've not had a sniff since really and the sides going backwards.

The problem for many years now has been the lack of players dedicated to the England cause, which players have had heart? which players would bleed for country? I can't think of one over the past 10yrs, mentally they're not at the races, club football to them is where the heart is not England and we've suffered because of that.

You can have all the ability in the world, but if you don't have a desire/heart you'll not get very far and thats been Englands problem for years now. We've a similar problem at Ewood now, where are the players that would run through brick walls? where are the players to carry the rest through the bad times?

[K-Hod]

It's the way football has gone Gav, the Champions League seems to be the pinnacle for a lot of players in this country, even though it's a rubbish version of the former European Cup driven purely by money (but I've covered that before, and there's no need for me to go off on a tangent!).

A lot of it is down to the media in this country as well, the players will view it as a chore, even when we win the press are outrageous with our players, they can't wait to 'knock 'em down' as it were. As well as massively over-hyping players whenever they have a couple of good games at club level if they're English. Just how much did people go on about Jack Wilshere initially? Because he ran forwards a bit and passed the ball well and didn't 'kick and rush' as the Kaiser put it? He's nowhere near the level of any European midfielders that are talked about, plus, the lad's reckless, and throws himself into tackles he shouldn't do, getting himself injured again in the process. Barkley's another one, he isn't THAT good, but he's decent, but far from the finished article.

We only have a few decent players, and they're in attacking areas- imo we're woefully short at centre half, right back is Clyne's for as long as he wants it, the other candidates have a bit of pace, nothing more imo. Shaw was having a great season until he broke his leg, but I'd say Gibbs/Baines are reasonable deputies, but they get found out at tournament level.

We don't seem to use our more creative players properly i.e. Lallana, but, hopefully he'll get minutes on the pitch under Klopp again.

[speeeeeeedie]

The problem for many years now has been the lack of players dedicated to the England cause, which players have had heart? which players would bleed for country? I can't think of one over the past 10yrs, mentally they're not at the races, club football to them is where the heart is not England and we've suffered because of that.

It's the way football has gone Gav, the Champions League seems to be the pinnacle for a lot of players in this country, even though it's a rubbish version of the former European Cup driven purely by money (but I've covered that before, and there's no need for me to go off on a tangent!).

This is where I think Hodgson has done well. He has a group of younger players who haven't (yet) played regularly in the latter stages of the Champs League. He has managed to make them a team, not a collection of stars. The squad is very balanced with players able to move into other positions easily. The last era had no balance at all.

The "golden generation" - I'll say 1999 - 2009, was golden for them and their clubs.

We will go out unluckily at the quarter final stages.