UKC

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12016_2896125,00.html

That didn't take long.

In reply to Toby S:

Should never have been given the job in the first place.

In reply to Toby S:

Just as well McLiesh is committed to the cause!!

Wonder how much he got paid, I would just get shown off the premises if I was shite at my job.......

And Venables in 40-1 for the job?!

In reply to Toby S:

BBC still saying an announcement due at 9:45

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/7100393.stm

In reply to Toby S:

Quickest way out of Wembley?

In a McLaren.

In reply to Toby S:


Just a lot too late.

In reply to Toby S:

£2.5m pay-off is the real sickener.

Whoever negotiates the contracts at the FA is either bent or retarded

In reply to Al Evans:

Did they even take their jackets off to make the decision? Can't imagine it was anything short of unanimous.

In reply to Toby S:

Let's face, they probably had already had a show of hands in the executive box at half-time.

In reply to hutchm:

I thought it was pretty telling when he took an age to walk out to the pitch at the start of the 2nd half. He must have realised that whatever the result ended up as last night that the writing was on the wall for him.

In reply to Toby S:

The biggest problem for the uk now (no uk teams qualified) is how the BBC will fill next summer's tv schedule.

In reply to trevor simpson:
You have to pay off someone for their notice if you choose to sack them.

If you don't give someone a long contract in the first place then (a) if they're successful, then they will be easy to poach from the position (b) you will not attract the best candidates who will require a long contract as a pre-requisite for taking the job.

Its the same all over football.....club level and international.

My dream is to be appointed England manager just once. i'd be absolute sh*te, but would walk away with millions

In reply to gollancz:

You would be better than McClaren

In reply to Removed User:
agreed. The directors naff off on their summer sojourns to Umbria and Tuscanny leaving us to watch repeats! No great loss to Englands repeated failure at tournaments...

In reply to gollancz:
the only up side of loosing, was there was no way he'd be kept on...


imagine if we had qualified.... we might have still had him for the world cup.

frankly i was in two minds if i wanted to win during the game, and think we have had a luck escape, we would only have been knocked out in the next match anyway

In reply to Removed User:


Ehm, the same way they would have if England had been there?

Most, if not all, of the games will be on live. It's just the associated "Beckham's broke his toenail" bullshit that won't be there this time.

In reply to gollancz:

No way, There's no having that rag gangster in the job. He wouldn't bring English football one jot.

In reply to Toby S:

Whilst we are on the subject of sacking, when is that w*nker John Motson going to go. He even had the neck to start talking about winning the group before the match had started.

In reply to trevor simpson:

My thoughts precisely... I'd like to see a few heads in the FA roll as well as SM's.

In reply to ali_mac:

The 'Gangsters' that do the picking are England's biggest problem? The whole procedure is done by accountants, 'carpet millionaires', and dodgy fatcat's who seem to answer to nobody?!

In reply to ali_mac:
I was being ironic.....honest.

In reply to Toby S:


Do you think he deliberately threw it? Nobody in their right mind would have taken his decision about not playing Becks unless they wanted to lose?

In reply to Al Evans:

No. Don't be bloody ridiculous.


I can fully understand why he opted to start Beckham on the bench. Beckham is short of match fitness and is no longer the player that he once was... And, yes, he supplied the cross for Crouch's goal but he didn't really do much else. A great percentage of his free kicks and corners screwed up last night.

In reply to Removed User:

Not mention Hansen et al jinxing it before the game had started by saying that they'd win 'easily'.

In reply to dek:


Have you ever met any of these alleged ne'er do wells?

In reply to Removed User:


Theres a multi discipline even happening in Beijing - or has Sky and ITV got those ones.

As long as Eurosport's still doing the Giro, Tour and Vuelta, I cant say as I'll miss watching dear old Engerland underachieving in Austria

In reply to Lord of Starkness:

I was trying to be ironic.

In reply to Knitted Simian:
Fraid not, have you? Barwick and the 'ne'er do wells' made a statement this morning on radio promising `"root and branch" review and changes to the England 'senior team' if required. No mention of their own duties and responsibilities in regard to management identification and selection and self interest. The fall guy has gone.

In reply to dek:

Yes, I spent 12 months seconded to the FA, working on a national community football programme.

I found them to be friendly, straightforward and desperately keen to see football succeeding at all levels. They were acutley aware of the need to support the game in the community and there were a number of schemes on the go. We had all sorts of leagues from kids 7 a side through to internationals based on teams of asylum seekers - where else would you see Iraq vs Somalia, played at Leyton Orient.

In reply to dek: The team won't change.

Mourinho, Benetiz, Ferguson, Wenger et al are top managers. They've trawled the world for the best footballers. In their clubs' teams (or were in) there are or were more than 11 top English players who will make up the nucleaus of the team for the next 4-8 years. It may not be trendy to say so but the best players do play for those clubs.

If you put out all the English players who played for them, they'd muder a team made of the best 11 of the English players in the rest of the league.

Just go back to the old 4-4-2.

Foster (from next year)

Neville Rio terry Cole

Wright Phillips Hargreaves Gerrard Cole

Owen rooney

Bench: Crouch, Richards, Carrick, Beckham, Lampard.

That team would qualify. It has rarely had the chance to play together, at all?, this qualifying tournament but there is no need for any changes to the squad. Mclaren tried that and brought it average players. Players who have been in the squad for years were dropped for some new 'in form' fans favourites, and look where we are now.

In reply to IainRUK:


A good example of this is Beckham. He might be a bit unfit but he can put a ball where it is needed and you only need that once or twice a game to make a difference (unfortunately he only did it once last night). Maclaren dropped him from the England squad when he took over for the simple reason that he wanted to look like the 'Big Man'.

In reply to Knitted Simian: Perhaps a study tour of the small successful european teams with a good skills setup would help England's future 'coach'? Croatia would be the first to spring to mind Pop 4.7M.
The kick and rush style displayed last night must make other European teams laugh up their sleeves!

In reply to dek:

It was like watching schoolboy football.

man on....man on

In reply to Removed User: When Beckham was on we won 2-1, enough said.

In reply to Toby S:

plus the stadium cost £757m and we get a surface as bad as a park pitch in january ...

In reply to stonewall:

Didn't want to mention that in case I get accused of making excuses, so:

<We would have lost regardless of the surface>

But it's not exactly what you expect lying on top of one of the most expensive stadia in the world. I thought the place had a roof so you didn't have to play on a swamp?

In reply to hutchm: croatia seemed to enjoy playing on that pitch

In reply to Erik B:

I think they would have taken us apart on the roughest bit of Hackney Marshes. I'm just thinking that they should hire a groundsman or two at Wembley. I expect loverly clean-looking, well drained grass in the national stadium. That way you keep your white shirt looking neat while you're being stuffed.

In reply to Toby S:

This might have been asked elswhere (on the countless other threads) but should anyone in the FA be resigning over this?

I mean, they have to take some responsibity for the manager but also for the state of the pitch.

In reply to hutchm:

Yes, I was amazed at the state of the pitch last night. There were even the remains of the lines of an American football pitch in some parts.

A crap surface and the rotten weather didn't help things but Croatia seemed perfectly at home in the conditions.

In reply to hutchm:

Yes, I was amazed at the state of the pitch last night. There were even the remains of the lines of an American football pitch in some parts.

A crap surface and the rotten weather didn't help things but Croatia seemed perfectly at home in the conditions.

I was in London yesterday and picked up an Evening Standard to read on the plane back to Embra. They led the sports page with a story of the Croatians "whingeing" about the state of the pitch. It seems they were right to but coped with it much better than England.

We need to reconsider the nations approach to football if we are to a) maintain it as the national sport and b) have a hope of winning anything (let alone qualify!).

A start, in all seriousness, would be to do something dramatic about player earnings. It's farcical. Never mind insulting to the punters and making the game too expensive to watch for many, it's plainly demotivating for the players. The problem, I suppose, is that even if one could convince (or make) the clubs impose salary limits. I guess cutting salaries amounts to constructive dismissal but what about FA imposed salary limits. Maybe "real" bonus incentives, not for playing in X matches, but for winning! Somehow they have to instill a real hunger to win.

In reply to Removed User:


Totally agree and think they need to look at themselves good and hard.

Money blown on Wembley (overbudget, delayed and not that great a stadium) meant they had to scrap the national football centre. They make huge pay-offs to Sven and now to McClaren.

Someone has to question what the real decision makers are doing. McClaren has paid the price for not being great at his job (and maybe it's not really his fault but partly the players and partly the system). Who pays the price at the FA for mismanaging the game for umpteen years to the point that, although we may have the best (or one of) leagues in the world, our national team is to be fair no better than the also rans of europe. They have managed us into mediocrity from what should have been a great platform.

In reply to trevor simpson:

Cheap, frankly. He's entitled to be paid up his entire contract unless they've a reason in employment law to sack him, and they don't.

Disappointing though. I had a bet on him not making it back to the dressing-room unsacked, and one feels that would have been a better gesture, sent out a better message. If knees are going to jerk they should at least jerk quickly.

jcm

jcm

In reply to JonC:

It isn't within the FA's powers to impose a salary cap. Something called the law.

jcm

In reply to JonC:

Do you understand the basic economic concept of supply and demand?

Or indeed look at it like this: of the 50 million people in england maybe 10 percent play football, it may be less but lets use this as an example. That is 5 million people.

Around The top 2000 players are professional, that is 0.04% of the playing population. the top 40 players (the ones who might get picked for england) are therefore 0.008 of the playing population.

Turnover in the premiership is what 1 billion a year plus?

now.................

What do the top 0.008% of the people who work in banks earn on the same sorts of turnover?

about the same as the top footballers if not more. So why should footballers earn less?

Most of the top players put glory before money, look at rooney, are you saying he has no "hunger to win" it's the nature of a sportsman whilst he is playing to give his/her all. They dont think about money on the pitch, more where to run to/pass to next.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Well, how about "agreed" salary limits? I acknowledge that pay is currently market forces driven and that there are legal issues with all aspects of this. But it was very hard to watch the match last night without thinking they were a) a bunch of over-paid w*nkers, and b) lacking any motivation partly as a result. If we somehow reduce the pay in the english league, we may also attract less foreign players which may be a good thing in reality.

In reply to smithaldo:


Yes - I acknowledge that (see other post) and that's part of my point. Something needs to be done to change that.


Most of my clients are in the very top % of UK's wealthiest, though I deal mostly with entrepreneurs, not city bankers. By and large they put more heart and soul into their work than a footballer.


But what about on the training pitch when they are honing their "technical skills"?

And also my point that partly due to the huge pay in the english league we have too many foreign players and not enough english players developing their talents.

In reply to JonC: OK, they don't get paid millions to play for England. They get millions to pay for their clubs.

reduce the pay, and English players will go too. Look at the pay in other countries. Why do many Scottish and Welsh players play in England?

In reply to JonC:
>
By and large they put more heart and soul into their work than a footballer.


I don't get this at all.

Do you seriously think that Ronaldo, Rooney, Gerrard, Lampard, Terry play with anything but 100% heart and soul?

In reply to IainRUK:

I agree, I find this notion that being paid a lot of money to play for their clubs undermotivates players when they play nationally bizarre.

Craig Gordon and James McFadden are paid a lot of money by English clubs. Does that mean they're undermotivated when they play for Scotland?

Top racing drivers are paid $20 million a season. Did Schumacher ever look undermotivated to you?

It's not so simple as that. I doubt if the players are undermotivated at all - lack of confidence and nervousness looked much more the problem to me last night - but if they are I suspect the biggest cause is the loss of connection between the supporters and the players which is so evident in Scotland. That's caused partly by the media but also I'm afraid partly because the Scots just have a healthier attitude to their team and players than we do.

jcm

Great footabbling truisms that are utter horse-sh*te:

1: They haven't got enough passion.
(If you want passion, pick the most passionate 11 nutters from the Wembley crowd.....and then watch them get beat)

2: Footballers are over-paid
(See post above. They are the creme-de-la-creme in a multi-billion pound business....yes even Robbie Savage is in that top .0008%. Salary caps were deemded illegal a century ago when employer cartels locked out striking workers. A cap would just make freddy Shepherd and his ilk richer)

3: There too many foreigners
a. So Stephen Gerard is sh*t because he plays against the best players in the world every week, rather than the best players in England.
b. were england any better 25 years ago before all the foreigners?
c. The problem is not that only 36 england players played in the premiership on the last PL weekend. It is that NONE played in SerieA, La Liga, the Bundesliga, la Championnat, etc.

4: We should cap the number of foreign players
a. It is illegal and you can find any sneaky way you like to impose it....and it will still be deemed illegal at EU level because the intention is irrefutably to favour one EU nationality over another.
b. There is a moral point here too. I believe that Xabi Alonso, Cesc Fabregas and Ronaldo have a fundamental right to ply their chosen trade here or enywhere else in Europe as I do. Freedom of movement is fundamental to the EU....not just some silly bye-law.

I feel so much better now.

In reply to gollancz:

A moral point?! Blimey. And why does Ronaldo have this moral right but not let us say some African player, pray tell?

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Easy. Its a mutual right.

I can play in Portugal. Ronaldo can play here. I can't play in Africa...etc. etc. When and if said African nation and the UK sign a treaty offering mutual freedom of movement and labour, I will be happy to welcome your African. (actually, I'd probably welcome him now if he is any good?)

People completely forget that the EU offers everyone within it freedom of movement by treaty. Without it, i wouldn't have worked in germany and I wouldn't be here in the UK now. When you think about it, its actually pretty cool. Imagine all those guys sitting down in the 50s after having bombed the living sh*t out of each other in WW2.....and then saying "let's let everyone live and work where they like". Totally revolutionary and had never been done before.

I think it is a pretty important right we just take for granted.

In reply to Toby S:
In fairness to McLaren, he didn't set his 'price' or level of renumberation. The FA themselves set that. The get out or sling your hook clause was also set by the FA in keeping with Svens contract.

Therefore McLaren was rich with the job or rich without the job. His predicessor saw to that. Its the FA that were stupid enough to set the president and carry on with the deal.

They (FA) are also stupid enough to stage American football on the hollowed turf.

In reply to ali_mac:


I was almost going to say I think you meant hallowed, but hollowed is actually about right.

In reply to Removed User:
yer, dug a hole for myself there alright

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
So how does the salary cap in rugby league work?

In reply to tony: Even if salary caps came in, it's not a cap per se, it's a link to revenue. Generally 50% of the revenue should be wages according to accounting firms. At man U wages are ~£85 million, Income ~£170 million, so even at £100,000k a week these wages are fine.

In reply to IainRUK:

In Rugby League, there's a link to revenue, but also an absolute finite maximum, and similarly, rugby union teams in the Guiness Premiership have a finite cap.

It's also interesting that Rugby League has a homegrown player rule which requires that clubs must include at least five players who have either come through their academy or are aged under 21 in their 25-strong squads.

In reply to tony:


I think that's coming in in football, in fact it may already be in.

In reply to IainRUK: http://www.tiscali.co.uk/news/newswire.php/news/reuters/2005/04/22/sport/ue...

In reply to gollancz and all you other "experts":

Something is clearly wrong with how our national team, and to my mind our national game, is performing currently.

I don't accept it is all the manager's fault. It *may* be coaching and selection issues but I don't think that's it really. And I don't think the majority of the pundits believe you can simply pick a better manager and, hey presto, it will all be ok.

Take last nights match. They played like morons for the first 45 minutes. They turned it on and played with fire for about 20 mins of the 2nd half, then sat back and got beat. It was clear as day. Where was the desire, motivation, belief etc?

Similarly, I don't care what you say, I won't pay to go and watch very highly paid players performing with such mediocrity. And there are many who feel the same as me.

If you are so ready to tell me that I am wrong, either we actually are doing better than seems to be the case (are you happy with the performances?!), or something has to change. Do you think it's as simple as needing a new manager? If not, what do you think needs changing?

My comments were intended to prompt thoughts/suggestions. You've just reacted precisely as most people do ie. head in the sand and we'll end up precisely back where we are now. Losers.

In reply to JonC: Woah, that's unlike you to be abusive?

Why am I a loser?

Why is that head in sand?

I've nowhere defended the set up, and not said changes need to be made, we just differed in opinion on where changes should be focussed. If for that we are losers fair enough.

If you don't pay to watch why are you bothered if they are overpaid?

In reply to Toby S:
I never claimed to have any solutions to the national team.

I just believe that passion is a completely over-rated virtue in football. I think you are leaping to conclusions when you observe that when they played well for 20 mins, they had 'desire' and when they played sh*te, they had none. I think you are merely projected YOUR passion on to a side that had a good spell during a bad performance.

In major finals, I sincerely believe that almost invariably, all teams have a huge passion to win....but statistically, 50% of them lose.

That's my point. Anyone searching for a cure to england's ills in a lack of passion is starting in the wrong place.

In reply to JonC: Why mention desire, banging my head on a brick wall, this is exactly what is wrong with English sport and why we don't play a technical game!

This desire and passion means we put our efforts into bringing through big competitive brutes rather than talented footballers. Forget passion and desire!

In reply to Toby S:

We need a bit of the old bulldog spirit to show these bloody foreigners just who rules the waves and the football pitch.

Good old Alf would have not put up with that shower of shit last night.

In reply to Harris Pilton: Exactly what we didn't need. That was why we attacked at 2-2 and lost!

In reply to JonC:
agreed with you loads. I got to belief during the second half, having levelled it, that we would go on for a 4-2 win. 'Bury the b*stards' is the required attitude. But as you state, they sat back then Bridge hit his own bar from which point it became fore gone.

McLaren failed completely through his reign to instill any system or style. To that end, it didn't matter what he threw onto the pitch by way of a team, the players were muddled into what it was they were playing too. So they performed like individuals which don't win you team games! If it did an African nation would have lifted the Jules Verne by now.

You take Chelsea players who play from the back along side Aresnal players (where?) who play on the floor through the middle, with Liverpool players who play down the wings with MUtd players who play at 100 mph and expect them to guess todays play based on who's playing upfront. What the f**k is that? And you don't need to be an 'expert' to see it! Yes?

Germany's style is studious and rigourous, patient.
Italy are patient and probing.
The French are firm and charismatic - as ever!

England's football has a style. It's tight, fast, hard and relentless. It's what the players bring from their clubs. Lets play to that. Not fu**ing kick and chase. Good ridence to McLaren and not before time. Total wally from start to finish.

In reply to IainRUK:

Erm, who lost last night and crashed out of Euro 2008? I think you have the wrong losers but feel free to call yourself one if you like

I watch occasionally on terrestrial TV, I don't bother going to matches any more. I do find it sickening that such poor standards are rewarded so highly as a matter of course. Call it market forces if you like but where is the incentive to raise standards?

It was interesting to hear a a commentator on Radio 5 say before the match that he was worried because Croatia are technically good. Well, why aren't we? That's not down to the manager is it. That's down to grass routes stuff and coaching at all levels. We need to shake the system up. It is often said that the number of foreign players stunts the growth potential of many home grown players. At the least, we don't have sufficient numbers of english players playing at a high level to have a big pool of talent to draw upon.

And I do think they lack passion. Passion doesn't necessarily mean playing like a brute either. It can be about a burning desire to win by being the best, which is a lifestyle mindset, not something for 90mins on a pitch.
Having said that I dont necessarily mean how they appear on the pitch, it was noticeable they didn't look *that* upset at the end, only Becks (and that I suspect because it could well be his last competitive international match)).

In reply to JonC: OK

But i do think they have high standards for 90% of the time, it's just with the country where it falls down. That's a problem.

But I think the way the FA and press deal with the players is a problem and why players like Scholes and Carragher have walked away. The FA throw bans about, huge fines, suspend before a court case even while innocent, so there's a big gap between the FA and the players. This needs addressing.

In reply to IainRUK: Why can't players like Ronaldo qualify for England on the grounds of residency?

In reply to Fiscale:

If you were Ronaldo would you want to play for England on the back of last nights performance?!

In reply to Simon22: A good point well made.

In reply to ali_mac:

.............Jules Verne?????

..........I agree with the rest though.

In reply to gollancz:
Obviously what you need is the services of a Herr B Vogts to help your cause