Why are the English terrible at football?

RealGunner wrote:

Arquitescu wrote:English youth teams aren't a myth. There is a serious crisis in the way methods are taught. Go to typical English youth camp and you'll see managers favour the ones who are taller, stronger and more physically developed than his peers. By the time that youth reaches his peak, others catch up eventually rendering the taller, stronger and more physically developed individual to useless considering most English camps do not focus on technique, but age old methods of memorization similar to the broken O-A Level GCSE systems. Schools of thought aren't there since they don't have the pedigree, hence why there is a modern adaptation of the godawful Coerver method in most English camps which teaches tricks and skills but you end up turning into an Adam Johnson. Managers of course play a part yet their priorities of focus on a youth's development are usually wrong and focused on work ethic and physical superiority. Which is admirable and all yet it isn't enough in Football.

I can confirm that's true. Have experienced that myself that coaches at under 13-14-15 level prefers the big strong lads over the smaller ones. However the good thing is that it's getting less frequent. It still exists but other clubs are slowly eradicating that. For example the english teams were technically all sound in the Next Gen tournament. But the problem remains that will those players be brought on in the right manner ?

Absolutely RG.

Of course there is improvement! English teams have slowly tried to bring a semblance of certainty within their development as that stability it will result in a consistent evolution of their identity, fuelled on the blueprint of England's signature work ethic and mentality. Mole has a point in saying the managers are missing to continually guide the English youth in order to surmount their potential. There is no need for foreign managers. English managers simply need to adapt and hybrid tactical blueprints with other schools of thought. BR (though Irish) did this by spending time in Netherlands, Espana etc with his own teachings of old English football.

Eventually by ergonomic gradual, England will form the identity which has been brought upon through trial and error, import of philosophies and EPL's multicultural mosaic which adds to the culture itself (though very very slowly) as which is why English youth have exploded this season. Next-Gen is just one example, teams like the ones I mentioned above and of course Arsenal who have Wilshere, Jenkinson, Gibbs, Chambo, and Walcott who has improved leaps and bounds.

Problems are still there, as are with any country. The stubbornness within English managers, hindrances, favouritism through media onto a certain individual, English media themselves, cultural habits and the evolution of Modern England can play its part.

Yet the signs are there, all there, of a consistent progress to an England, given a platform by EPL's improved attitude to their youth.

Bought in the right manner? Who says they have to move out. There is a reason why Italians prefer to stay in Italia, same goes for England. Why move out of your home league when its among the top? Managers, the main problem along with the nascent stage youth camps MUST be more consistent in strategy to develop English youth, their utilization and augmentation of their respective potential.

Top teams are leading this path through their individual crafted philosophies, mid to lower teams now need to follow their example even if it costs them financially.

Point must be made, without Wenger, this whole England youth re-development would have been 10 years behind. People need to realize the effect he has had on the EPL

You mean like Capello?

I can't agree about him not looking to the future. In his year in charge, he's given caps to the likes of Butland, Forster, Jenkinson, Chamberlain, Sterling and Cleverley and has called up McCarthy and Lallana where another manager may have just called up Paul Robinson, Gareth Barry and Shaun Wright-Phillips.

In fact, when everyone is fit again, the squad is going to have an unprecedented number of young players: Butland, Jones, Smalling, Gibbs, Walker, Wilshere, Cleverley, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Sterling, Sturridge, Welbeck...

In any case, I believe Hodgson to only be here to pick up the pieces from the last generation and oversee the transition to the next. I doubt he'll still be manager after the World Cup unless he works a miracle and gets us to a semi-final or something (of course, we still have to qualify first).

Capello's problem was different.

-His poor communication skill since he English was unrefined caused a highly in congruent barrier to which a diverse group of English players wouldn't respond accurately. It didn't hurt that his signature authoritarian and gruelling lifestyle mentally wasn't symmetrical to how the squad needed to be treated like. Results? Players did not follow according the the order, to the tactics. A system was built yet it simply wasn't suited to the circumstances. All incongruent

If I can remember, before the World Cup his English side were very good and had some excellent tactical football in the qualifications. Within the world cup, the unfortunate clash of "egos" and groups made by their own teams caused little to no team spirit and players literally barking at each other on the field. Capello, could not follow suit with his poor communication. Hodgson and Redknapp were wanted because they know the squad inside out, they know them personally, how their mentality works, how they should be treated along with a past connection onto how each player is optimized upon. Their persona and man management alone, is responsible for the improved spirit within the 3 lions.

I will never see much in Hodgson and haven't seen much in his England. Fact is, a lot of you underrate your players, your youth and the squad propensity, and Hodgson is a dinosaur in what is a new era for the English team. He isn't a leader, or a tactician and players of England's calibre deserve a superior manager.

Improvements? Well he has shown the ability to learn from his mistakes and has finally strayed away from his "4 banks of 2". I also enjoy that he gives chances to a wide variety of players by his own choice, rather than influence through the media.

He can do well, yet should not be long term

You got all this from a pointless end of season friendly?

My point about Capello was that despite him being a top European coach, his record with England wasn't much of an improvement over Erikson's and won't be much of an improvement over Hodgson's if Hodgson's England qualifies for the World Cup and gets out of the groups. It's by no means a guarantee that a foreign coach can just walk in and do better with this England side than Hodgson can simply by being a better manager. Being able to effectively communicate with your players and understand the culture is massively important in international management.

I acknowledge that Hodgson isn't a top manager and I agree he isn't the one to lead to us beyond the next World Cup, but I do feel a lot of the criticism that has come his way since he's taken over is largely unwarranted. He's working with a squad that's in transition and hasn't got many experienced players he can rely upon. He's experimented with two or three different systems - he beat Brazil and Italy playing 4-3-3. A lot of the players he has to call upon aren't in great form for their clubs or are injured.

We may underrate our players and potential, but the fact remains that the best we can reasonably expect is another quarter-final. Our main aim should be to progress towards a better squad and playing style and we're doing that, albeit at a very slow pace.

GoonerJay29 wrote:My point about Capello was that despite him being a top European coach, his record with England wasn't much of an improvement over Erikson's and won't be much of an improvement over Hodgson's if Hodgson's England qualifies for the World Cup and gets out of the groups. It's by no means a guarantee that a foreign coach can just walk in and do better with this England side than Hodgson can simply by being a better manager. Being able to effectively communicate with your players and understand the culture is massively important in international management.

I acknowledge that Hodgson isn't a top manager and I agree he isn't the one to lead to us beyond the next World Cup, but I do feel a lot of the criticism that has come his way since he's taken over is largely unwarranted. He's working with a squad that's in transition and hasn't got many experienced players he can rely upon. He's experimented with two or three different systems - he beat Brazil and Italy playing 4-3-3. A lot of the players he has to call upon aren't in great form for their clubs or are injured.

We may underrate our players and potential, but the fact remains that the best we can reasonably expect is another quarter-final. Our main aim should be to progress towards a better squad and playing style and we're doing that, albeit at a very slow pace.

My point on communication was, that Capello and the English squad weren't correspondent or compatible. While that was Capello's fault, his hold of the language prevented him from adapting.

I mean look at him in Russia, a squad congruent with his ideas and beliefs and surprisingly he has learned Russian faster than English ( ) and building a wonderful team.

Which is why I stand with England in them needing an English manager as they are ones who are attuned in comparability with a rather unique squad mentality, an acquired one.

The rest of your post? Well just read my response to RG above, you might or might not agree, Jay.

rwo power wrote:

Gil wrote:Hell the Germans even play the long ball more than we do!

Well, our long balls at least usually find the proper targets, though. ^^

LuckAndWin wrote:Yes, they were very terrible.

Using traditional German kits just doesn't suffice

Yes, this is only an international friendly but they required to perform well. Perhaps the coach replace some players that will suit the whole team?