Here's what I'd like from England Football team

preston61

BigLicks67 said:

preston61 said:

BigLicks67 said:

The shame about Jonny was that he got injured after the World Cup win and denied RU the chance to build on it's popularity after the win with him as its figurehead.

As for England - I think we should have a 10 year hiatus were we bypass Russia/Qatar and save the general populace any further heartache and disappointment, by which point we may have a new national sport which we are good at.

We do, its called Rugby

I said good at - going out in the group phases in your own World Cup does not constitute being good.

Thats one of the dullest comments I've read in a while

I think it's fair to say that that was a blip on the England team at the time, and showed that although Lancaster wasn't bad at his job, he wasn't able to coach at the very highest level. Also, since the WC England havent lost and have played world class opposition. Sure they can improve, which is scary for other countries, but you can't compare the England team that went out at the WC to the one that is now representiing the country very well, and they are certainly doing a better job than the footballers ever have (bar 1966)

lloyd

The England rugby team were good under Lancaster, they're just a bit better under Jones, not vastly.

The WC was shit because of a few reasons-there fitness preparation apparently had them down to peak in the latter stages, which was evidenced by them visibly tiring against a Welsh side who were a lot fitter than them, which led to a fucking stupid, tired decision by Robshaw to go for the line, which could well have been a good option had Hartley (now the current captain) ruled himself out of the WC by being a naughty boy again.

Burgess inclusion-stupid on many levels, not least squad harmony.

Itoje-non-selection, possibly too early for him, but 6 months after he's been ripping up trees.

Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges-totally different beasts.

preston61

lloyd said:

The England rugby team were good under Lancaster, they're just a bit better under Jones, not vastly.

The WC was shit because of a few reasons-there fitness preparation apparently had them down to peak in the latter stages, which was evidenced by them visibly tiring against a Welsh side who were a lot fitter than them, which led to a fucking stupid, tired decision by Robshaw to go for the line, which could well have been a good option had Hartley (now the current captain) ruled himself out of the WC by being a naughty boy again.

Burgess inclusion-stupid on many levels, not least squad harmony.

Itoje-non-selection, possibly too early for him, but 6 months after he's been ripping up trees.

Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges-totally different beasts.

Agree fully

Have done my best to forget the Burgess episode, terrible decision. But we have the right man in charge now and I am very hopeful for the future.

Just to be clear, I have been watching and playing football since 1988 and it was always my first love growing up. I only got into rugby when I moved to Wales in 2003 and am now starting to prefer it simply because the constant underperforming from the England football team has worn me down. We don't have to win everything, I'm not unrealistic, I just wish we'd play with some identity and conviction, I could be proud of a team that loses to a better side but gave everything in doing so 

lloyd

preston61 said:

lloyd said:

The England rugby team were good under Lancaster, they're just a bit better under Jones, not vastly.

The WC was shit because of a few reasons-there fitness preparation apparently had them down to peak in the latter stages, which was evidenced by them visibly tiring against a Welsh side who were a lot fitter than them, which led to a fucking stupid, tired decision by Robshaw to go for the line, which could well have been a good option had Hartley (now the current captain) ruled himself out of the WC by being a naughty boy again.

Burgess inclusion-stupid on many levels, not least squad harmony.

Itoje-non-selection, possibly too early for him, but 6 months after he's been ripping up trees.

Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges-totally different beasts.

Agree fully

Have done my best to forget the Burgess episode, terrible decision. But we have the right man in charge now and I am very hopeful for the future.

Just to be clear, I have been watching and playing football since 1988 and it was always my first love growing up. I only got into rugby when I moved to Wales in 2003 and am now starting to prefer it simply because the constant underperforming from the England football team has worn me down. We don't have to win everything, I'm not unrealistic, I just wish we'd play with some identity and conviction, I could be proud of a team that loses to a better side but gave everything in doing so 

Typical England Rugby fan  

preston61

Haha, it was more that I'd never watched it before moving to Wales for Uni, and once I was here I couldn't escape it! It was helpful that I happend to start watching when we were at our best, could you imagine if I'd started watching a year or two later, I got very lucky with the timing.

lloyd

preston61 said:

Haha, it was more that I'd never watched it before moving to Wales for Uni, and once I was here I couldn't escape it! It was helpful that I happend to start watching when we were at our best, could you imagine if I'd started watching a year or two later, I got very lucky with the timing.

I started watching Wales in the early 90's mate so yeah, i can imagine it, and much, much worse! 

UnclePsychosis

It's daft comparing England Rugby and England football.

It's not exactly difficult to be the world's best rugby team when only about eight countries worldwide are any good at it. See also cricket.

The English football team have to contend with the fact that pretty much every nation on earth has professional football leagues and the entire globe is football crazy. Scotland are a top-ten rugby nation despite only having two professional clubs. We're a non entity football wise despite having a league setup of 42 teams, 20 of which are full time professional.

Being world leaders at football is orders of magnitude harder than doing the same in Rugby.

lloyd

UnclePsychosis said:

Being world leaders at football is orders of magnitude harder than doing the same in Rugby.

Incorrect, football doesn't have to beat the bloody All Blacks to be the best!

BigLicks67

preston61 said:

BigLicks67 said:

preston61 said:

BigLicks67 said:

The shame about Jonny was that he got injured after the World Cup win and denied RU the chance to build on it's popularity after the win with him as its figurehead.

As for England - I think we should have a 10 year hiatus were we bypass Russia/Qatar and save the general populace any further heartache and disappointment, by which point we may have a new national sport which we are good at.

We do, its called Rugby

I said good at - going out in the group phases in your own World Cup does not constitute being good.

Thats one of the dullest comments I've read in a while

I think it's fair to say that that was a blip on the England team at the time, and showed that although Lancaster wasn't bad at his job, he wasn't able to coach at the very highest level. Also, since the WC England havent lost and have played world class opposition. Sure they can improve, which is scary for other countries, but you can't compare the England team that went out at the WC to the one that is now representiing the country very well, and they are certainly doing a better job than the footballers ever have (bar 1966)

The proof is in the pudding my friend, winning games under no pressure is not the same as winning in competitions.  The England football team recently beat Germany 3-2. Now Germany, as anyone will tell you are world class opposition. England also never lost a game in qualification against so called inferior opposition. So, my so called dull comment refers to England's RU performance and when it mattered which was short of the mark and considering they are a major nation in terms of Rugby history and population size they have massively underachieved over the years.

To be quite frank I get sick of Rugby elitists comparing a sport played by a small minority of the world's population to a truly global sport which is much more competitive and difficult to succeed in.

hobbio

Nitefly said:

What I discerned was a disturbing lack of basic skills - trapping a ball, first touch, etc.  How can people get in the national team when they only have one good foot?  

Messi manages ok with one foot to kick and the other to stand on.

preston61

 

BigLicks67 said:

preston61 said:

BigLicks67 said:

preston61 said:

BigLicks67 said:

The shame about Jonny was that he got injured after the World Cup win and denied RU the chance to build on it's popularity after the win with him as its figurehead.

As for England - I think we should have a 10 year hiatus were we bypass Russia/Qatar and save the general populace any further heartache and disappointment, by which point we may have a new national sport which we are good at.

We do, its called Rugby

I said good at - going out in the group phases in your own World Cup does not constitute being good.

Thats one of the dullest comments I've read in a while

I think it's fair to say that that was a blip on the England team at the time, and showed that although Lancaster wasn't bad at his job, he wasn't able to coach at the very highest level. Also, since the WC England havent lost and have played world class opposition. Sure they can improve, which is scary for other countries, but you can't compare the England team that went out at the WC to the one that is now representiing the country very well, and they are certainly doing a better job than the footballers ever have (bar 1966)

The proof is in the pudding my friend, winning games under no pressure is not the same as winning in competitions.  The England football team recently beat Germany 3-2. Now Germany, as anyone will tell you are world class opposition. England also never lost a game in qualification against so called inferior opposition. So, my so called dull comment refers to England's RU performance and when it mattered which was short of the mark and considering they are a major nation in terms of Rugby history and population size they have massively underachieved over the years.

To be quite frank I get sick of Rugby elitists comparing a sport played by a small minority of the world's population to a truly global sport which is much more competitive and difficult to succeed in.

Hard to disagree with some of that mate. England massively underperformed at the world cup last year, losing to Wales was our own fault, having been ahead for so long, however Australia were excellent against us and were simply the better team on the day. So if we were having this conversation in 2015, then sure I would be more inclined to agree with you that England didn’t cut it. However having won the grand slam this year after such a shocking WC and then white washing the 2^nd best team in the world in their own back yard, you can’t aim the same criticism at the Rugby team about bottling it. These 3 match test series are as competitive as international rugby gets outside the world cups as there is no such thing as a friendly, so there is always pressure on. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

As far as the Germany game goes, there was no pressure on England as no one expected them to win, also as it was a friendly there was nothing at stake bar bragging rights when players returned to their clubs. I watched that game, and what was impressive was the desire the England team showed that I’d not seen for a long time, and haven’t since. They then went and followed that result with a defeat to a Dutch side 4 days later who looked incredibly average. Since the last world cup one good result against Germany, and the away win in Switzerland at the start of the euro qualifying campaign, is simply not good enough for a country with the volumes of players, money and support than England has. Those 2 years should have been enough for the England team to find an identity and a style of play. It’s one thing to lose having given everything, knowing that you did all you could to make sure that the only way you lose is by being beaten by another side. It is however truly unforgiveable to make the same mistakes repeatedly and do nothing to change them. Einstein said that repeating something the same way multiple times and then expecting different results is the definition of insanity, it would be fair to describe the FA as insane.

 

To be clear, I would rather we had a successful football team, I’d trade us being good at any other sport for it, but until we start to play like an actual team (and it pains me to say it, like Wales do #togetherstronger) I am glad we have some success in other sports, other wise it would truly be depressing to be an English sports fan

Nitefly

hobbio said:

Nitefly said:

What I discerned was a disturbing lack of basic skills - trapping a ball, first touch, etc.  How can people get in the national team when they only have one good foot?  

Messi manages ok with one foot to kick and the other to stand on.

True, but I bet he can do either with either foot (not at the same time, of course) 

hobbio

@Nitefly

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35962597

His right foot is mainly for standing ;p

chrispy108

Messi and Ronaldo are both incredibly one footed. I've had the discussion with many academy coaches how at an English academy there "incorrect" dribbling styles would be coached out of them rather than embracced

axisus

chrispy108 said:

Messi and Ronaldo are both incredibly one footed. I've had the discussion with many academy coaches how at an English academy there "incorrect" dribbling styles would be coached out of them rather than embracced

When you are as good as them who gives a sh*t. I can see English academies training all the talent out of people. Just look at Tennis, the only decent player we have had in the past 50 years didn't touch the LTA with a barge pole.

mike_l

One thing the footballers can, and should take from the rugby team is to play as a team, and do your job.

There's 11 out on the field, with 11 separate jobs to do, do those 11 jobs better than the opposing 11 and you have a better chance of winning. Not doing 10 of those jobs at all gives no chance of winning.

 

Nitefly

@hobbio - fair enough!

I get that any player will have a favoured foot (left in his case) but the 71 from the right foot show that he can use either pretty well!

Clarky

England could learn a great deal from Wales and Iceland in just about every aspect of the game

and how to invest in, build and run a team as a long term project

scrumhalf

Clarky said:

England could learn a great deal from Wales and Iceland in just about every aspect of the game

and how to invest in, build and run a team as a long term project

I would imagine that just about every Welsh and Icelandic player considers it an honour to play for their national team. I don't feel that's the case with England.

chrispy108

Perhaps for Iceland, but not for Wales. Most of the squad have tenuous links to Wales. They're playing well because they're a united team fighting for the same thing, not because of nationalism.