Well I have said it and thought it for many years and my view has not changed. England just don't understand how to approach international tournament football.
The idea that high tempo Premier League style football can work in international tournament play is imo flawed.
The high quality foreign players in the Premier League make the English players look better than they actually are and I believe this has been the case for some time.
Once the England players arrive to play tournament football the same clueless, gormless style kicks in.
Tear into the opposition for as long as possible, then run out of ideas, puff or both and then get holes picked in us.
And on occasion chuck in a few clangers to really compound the misery. The way England play international football is unsophisticated, uncoordinated and shambolic.
England manager after England manager failing to know what the best team or way of playing actually is and ultimately England just revert to type. No doubt there will be the customary post mortem and scapegoat hunting from some quarters.
I don't buy into this lack of desire, lack of pride in the shirt business. I think sometimes that is a lazy accusation that is too easy to make and difficult to prove.
Am I surprised by this defeat?
In all honesty no.
When it comes to imagination and knowing how to execute a tournament gameplan the truth imo is that England been deficient for many years.
Breaking down teams like Iceland for top quality teams is a more than achievable task. For England at tournaments and under pressure it has proven consistently troublesome.
Just fobbing it off as lack of desire and pride is imo a pile of old nonsense and always has been.
The football philosophy requires change and the whole mentality requires change with it.
To just sit there and say A, B and C and a few others are a bunch of w#nkers and everybody should F off is not helpful.
Roy Hodgson was clearly not the man to enable fundamental and meaningful change and has rightly gone but I do wonder whether it is about a lot more than just which manager is next selected for the poisoned chalice that is the job of England Head Coach.
Personally my two choices to replace Hodgson , Mark Warburton or Eddie Howe .
(27-06-2016 23:44 )snookered147 Wrote: [ -> ]I don't buy into this lack of desire, lack of pride in the shirt business. I think sometimes that is a lazy accusation that is too easy to make and difficult to prove.
Just fobbing it off as lack of desire and pride is imo a pile of old nonsense and always has been.
It isn't fobbing off. I wasn't fobbing anything off when I spoke about the fact that Iceland wanted it more. You saw it for yourself - Iceland were quicker to every ball, first to every second ball and far more determined to keep the ball out of the net.
To accuse myself and others, albeit not directly, but you have said it all the same, of 'fobbing off' by talking about lack of desire is really hurtful. The kind of desire and passion that Iceland showed tonight is what I care passionately about and what the game should be about. England showed none of that, and it was there for all, including you, to see.
(27-06-2016 23:50 )Regenerated Wrote: [ -> ]It isn't fobbing off. I wasn't fobbing anything off when I spoke about the fact that Iceland wanted it more. You saw it for yourself - Iceland were quicker to every ball, first to every second ball and far more determined to keep the ball out of the net.
To accuse myself and others, albeit not directly, but you have said it all the same, of 'fobbing off' by talking about lack of desire is really hurtful. The kind of desire and passion that Iceland showed tonight is what I care passionately about and what the game should be about. England showed none of that, and it was there for all, including you, to see.
Iceland had a gameplan and executed it.
England especially in the 2nd half did not.
They let the clangers get to them and reverted to type.
Lack of effort and desire is hard to prove.
The England players looked distraught at the end so I refuse to accept they don't care. Iceland gave 100% of course and I am not denying that. But the key for me was they executed the gameplan better than England and played better. End of story.
(27-06-2016 23:44 )snookered147 Wrote: [ -> ]Well I have said it and thought it for many years and my view has not changed. England just don't understand how to approach international tournament football.
The idea that high tempo Premier League style football can work in international tournament play is imo flawed.
The high quality foreign players in the Premier League make the English players look better than they actually are and I believe this has been the case for some time.
Once the England players arrive to play tournament football the same clueless, gormless style kicks in.
Tear into the opposition for as long as possible, then run out of ideas, puff or both and then get holes picked in us.
And on occasion chuck in a few clangers to really compound the misery. The way England play international football is unsophisticated, uncoordinated and shambolic.
England manager after England manager failing to know what the best team or way of playing actually is and ultimately England just revert to type. No doubt there will be the customary post mortem and scapegoat hunting from some quarters.
I don't buy into this lack of desire, lack of pride in the shirt business. I think sometimes that is a lazy accusation that is too easy to make and difficult to prove.
Am I surprised by this defeat?
In all honesty no.
When it comes to imagination and knowing how to execute a tournament gameplan the truth imo is that England been deficient for many years.
Breaking down teams like Iceland for top quality teams is a more than achievable task. For England at tournaments and under pressure it has proven consistently troublesome.
Just fobbing it off as lack of desire and pride is imo a pile of old nonsense and always has been.
The football philosophy requires change and the whole mentality requires change with it.
To just sit there and say A, B and C and a few others are a bunch of w#nkers and everybody should F off is not helpful.
Roy Hodgson was clearly not the man to enable fundamental and meaningful change and has rightly gone but I do wonder whether it is about a lot more than just which manager is next selected for the poisoned chalice that is the job of England Head Coach.
I agree largely with you but the idea that England play high tempo football is wrong. Yes they press high and close down quickly without the ball but in possession, in my opinion, are too lethargic and take too long to move the ball.
I strongly agree with you that players lack desire, heart, passion is too easy an excuse. I don't believe Iceland wanted it more just that they had a structured plan and had a belief in what they were doing. England seemed disjointed and seemed to lack a coherent game plan. Especially after going behind. One could accuse England of caring too much leading to their freezing and making mistakes due to their trepidation of making mistakes. There's no doubt that the PL is overrated in terms of boosting the value and reputation of English players.
At the end of day everyone is gonna have there opinion in what went wrong, what we can all agree on is we played poorly and we paid the price for being knocked out.
(27-06-2016 23:58 )snookered147 Wrote: [ -> ] (27-06-2016 23:50 )Regenerated Wrote: [ -> ]It isn't fobbing off. I wasn't fobbing anything off when I spoke about the fact that Iceland wanted it more. You saw it for yourself - Iceland were quicker to every ball, first to every second ball and far more determined to keep the ball out of the net.
To accuse myself and others, albeit not directly, but you have said it all the same, of 'fobbing off' by talking about lack of desire is really hurtful. The kind of desire and passion that Iceland showed tonight is what I care passionately about and what the game should be about. England showed none of that, and it was there for all, including you, to see.
Iceland had a gameplan and executed it.
England especially in the 2nd half did not.
They let the clangers get to them and reverted to type.
Lack of effort and desire is hard to prove.
The England players looked distraught at the end so I refuse to accept they don't care. Iceland gave 100% of course and I am not denying that. But the key for me was they executed the gameplan better than England and played better. End of story.
You've just said it yourself. Iceland gave 100%. England didn't. The tears at the end have been seen many a time before, and it's getting tiresome. If they were so distraught they should have given more in the game.
The "fobbing off" accusation was an outrageous thing to say.
(27-06-2016 23:50 )Regenerated Wrote: [ -> ]The kind of desire and passion that Iceland showed tonight is what I care passionately about and what the game should be about. England showed none of that, and it was there for all, including you, to see.
I cannot agree with that mate, they seemed to push as hard as ever and they simply could not deliver.
Disjointed and quite frankly..... shit
Get a manager who played for England - like Chris Coleman with Wales
(28-06-2016 00:05 )Regenerated Wrote: [ -> ]You've just said it yourself. Iceland gave 100%. England didn't. The tears at the end have been seen many a time before, and it's getting tiresome. If they were so distraught they should have given more in the game.
The "fobbing off" accusation was an outrageous thing to say.
Ahem.
I did indeed say Iceland gave 100%.
But nobody can definitively prove England did not.
Crocodile tears are equally hard to prove.
A misexecuted gameplan and poor performance can often look like lack of desire when it may well not be.
To be honest every time England get knocked out I hear the same accusations of lack of desire and pride in the shirt and I simply do not accept that so many tournament exits boil down to that.
I hear the same thing on football phone ins most weeks
.
I do not accept the fobbing off comment was outrageous.
I have heard it all before.
We will have to agree to disagree I'm afraid.