Football World Cup 2010.

[SilverHood]

Denmark will be the surprise team of the tournament, calling it now.

 

[ilaya]

denmark hmm... maybes... in another thread i said the winter weather in south africa gonna be a factor, so maybes denmark will suprise a few peeps too.

with regards to england game v japan.. cant read too much into that tbh.. sure its supposed to be a warm up game .. but their minds aint on that.. they on world cup itself. also gotta remember japanese team aint half bad these days.. they swarmed the pitch and made passing almost impossible at ground level.

i think cappello is keeping his cards close to his chest.. so didnt reveal too much about how england gonna play in WC.. he was checking other stuff.

 

[Raven]

I am hoping the shit play has been intentional to put the opposition into a false sense of security. Though I know it isn't. I just hope we can sort it out in time for the real thing, we do play better in tournaments than friendlies though so fingers crossed.

 

[Olgaline]

realisticly Danmark should hope to end second in the group "unless Holland have some major melt down" this puts denmark up against a likely match vs Italy...and even if Danmark then wins that, the quater final would likely bring Brazil or Portugal....

So I've gotta say if denmark gets past all of that, they'll be favorits going into the Semi

 

[rynnor]

How long will it take before the commentators start talking about 1966? That's what amuses me the most.

Sometimes I wonder if the commentators are watching a different game tbh.

I do wonder a little about Cappelo's tactics - there is the suspicion that hes deliberately playing weirdly shaped teams to keep the opposition guessing but that seems a tad paranoid?

I'm not a football manager but in his place I would have tried to play the friendlies with pretty much the lineup I'd be taking to the World Cup to give them more experience of playing together so that they function better as a team?

 

[rynnor]

Poor Walcott but tbh he hasnt looked that good in the friendlies and Lennon offers the same skills but does them better/faster.

I would have taken Bent too but only as backup.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

Choosing SWP ahead of Walcott is utterly baffling.

 

[Scouse]

Choosing SWP ahead of Walcott is utterly baffling.

I'm sort of with you there. However, I will say that Walcott hasn't got a final ball, and I'm guessing Capello's thinking is - it doesn't matter how easy he can get down the line if he can't put a cross in more often than not...

 

[Ch3tan]

Choosing SWP ahead of Walcott is utterly baffling.

Why? They are both poor, but SWP can be utilised more easily on both flanks than walcott, and just about has a better final ball. Lennon is the reason Walnutt did not get it, same player barring an inch of pace, but Lennon can finish and pass more often.

 

[rynnor]

I'm sort of with you there. However, I will say that Walcott hasn't got a final ball, and I'm guessing Capello's thinking is - it doesn't matter how easy he can get down the line if he can't put a cross in more often than not...

I think its more the way Walcott faded off in the last few games - he hasnt looked in it tbh.

 

[DaGaffer]

Lennon has simply had a much better season than Walcott and they're too similar to take both.

I'm still not convinced about taking a striker who can't score to a knockout competition, but then I'm not paid £8m a year to make these decisions; I'd have taken Bent (I'd have also played most games with Gerrard up front behind Rooney, but what do I know?).

 

[ST^]

I'd have taken Bent, probably instead of Defoe.

 

[rynnor]

On the plus side theres nothing really contravertsial about any of the decisions - big change from last time

 

[Aph3x]

I fear for England when if we're 1 - 0 down in a quarter final and have 30 mins left to get an equaliser and only have Emile Heskey on the bench. Slightly biased view here but Bent would give something different, he plays on the shoulder of the last defender and has a load of pace, also has a bit more strength than Defoe. Cant do the target man thing but we're not a long hoof the ball up front kind of team.

 

[Trem]

Ha!

That selection is a joke, taking Gareth Barry when he won't be fit for at least 3 games, taking Carrick and taking Heskey is a piss take, yes they have performed in the past but fuck me they have both been shit this season. Why wasn't Adam Johnson taken and why in the name of holy christ is Scott Parker going?

If we get out of the group stage we will get no further, if (a below par) Rooney gets injured early on its all over.

 

[Turamber]

Heskey deserves his chance, he was excellent in the qualifying campaign. I like Darren Bent but his goals mostly come from balls over the top and you just don't play international football that way, just ask Graham Taylor.

We have plenty of options from Heskey leading the line, holding the ball up and winning flick ons for Rooney to more intricate formations with Gerrard or Joe Cole playing as withdrawn strikers, maybe Milner in the hole.

None of the other strikers have grasped the nettle, Defoe was anonymous in his international appearances, ditto Bent. Agbonlahor actually looked decent upfront but was dropped and not brought back again.

Taking Warnock is such a strange decision. Good defender, yes, but played <15 minutes of international football two years ago.

 

[Ch3tan]

Ha!
and why in the name of holy christ is Scott Parker going?

Seriously? He's been one of the best midfielders this season, at times single handedly driving west ham on.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

The thing with Walcott is he's been playing football for Arsenal, competing and impressing against Barcelona when the rest of our team decided not to show up.

SWP has been kept out of the Man City team by Adam Johnson over the last few weeks, that's how rubbish he has been this season (this is not a slight on Johnson, just shows that a player with no experience walks into a team ahead of him). Man City haven't been playing at the top level all season, and Walcott can be deployed as a ST if needed, and he's played a few times at ML/AML (not much for Arsenal but it is somewhere he's familiar with).

On a squad selection basis, choosing SWP doesn't make full sense. It doesn't matter if Walcott should start or not, having him in the squad would be a huge boost. If you're a manager, looking to make a change that will have some effect, Walcott is more likely to come off the bench and make an impact.

 

[DaGaffer]

Seriously? He's been one of the best midfielders this season, at times single handedly driving west ham on.

Um Scott Parker isn't going.

 

[Ch3tan]

Um Scott Parker isn't going.

Heh! I'm just replying to Trem. My bad, on merit Parker should be there instead of Carrick.

 

[Scouse]

I'd have taken Bent, probably instead of Defoe.

I've never been a fan of Defoe, but although I've not watched much of Bent's play I always throught he was pretty easy to handle. No?

I'd have also played most games with Gerrard up front behind Rooney

This

 

[Trem]

Heh! I'm just replying to Trem. My bad, on merit Parker should be there instead of Carrick.

Sorry, my bad, I meant Stephen Warnock.

 

[Scouse]

Taking Warnock is such a strange decision. Good defender, yes, but played <15 minutes of international football two years ago.

He won't choke. I thought it was a bad move when Benitez sold him. He wasn't amazing or anything, but he wasn't shit either. Full of heart.

 

[Aoami]

I'd have taken Bent, probably instead of Defoe.

Same. I think Heskey is useless, but so is Defoe. Bent and Defoe are a similar type of player but Bent is stronger, and has been in much better form, especially at the end of the season where Defoe faded massively.

Also, if we're going to play this 4-4-2 that Capello likes, Crouch has to start ahead of Heskey. I am still firly of the belief that he can do everything Heskey can do, and also scores goals. Heskey vs Mexico (i think) when he went for that diving header, glorious chance, but just fell over like that fat lump he is, sums him up for me.

As others have said, with the players picked, i think the best formation is a 4-5-1 with barry holding, lampard roaming, gerrard playing off rooney, with cole and lennon on the flanks. Back 4 picks itself. Perhaps stick Wes Brown in at right back instead of Johnson against attacking sides.

 

[rynnor]

Same. I think Heskey is useless, but so is Defoe. Bent and Defoe are a similar type of player but Bent is stronger, and has been in much better form, especially at the end of the season where Defoe faded massively.

I think the bigger picture on that one is that Defoe and Crouch have played together for a long time and make a good pairing. Its not about taking all your absolutely best players but about building a team that can play together.

 

[Aoami]

When are Crouch and Defoe ever going to start upfront together for England though?

 

[Marc]

I think the bigger picture on that one is that Defoe and Crouch have played together for a long time and make a good pairing. Its not about taking all your absolutely best players but about building a team that can play together.

So no rooney then? Or are you going for the championship manager circa 1999 stylee of playing 3 strikers up front

 

[Scouse]

What if Rooney gets injured?

 

[rynnor]

So no rooney then? Or are you going for the championship manager circa 1999 stylee of playing 3 strikers up front

When hes injured but more likely I'd see this as a substitution type formation.

 

[Trem]

I am a massive Carlton Cole fan, for him not to be given at least a run out against Japan is madness in my eyes.

If he is confident he is such a special player, so much more than Heskey and Bent, although I would of took Bent instead of Heskey.