Danny Welbeck | 2011-14 Performances

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm always right said:
So why all the rest of the nonsense about "his poor form is clearly from being in a new team and nothing else" :confused:

I get your point about using a big man in the England set-up, but I think Crouch is better big man if we wanted to go for that option, Holt too. I also think that Welbeck proved today why he's a better option, because England will defend, and his pace on counter attacks etc. will get him into positions Carroll will never get into. I can't see us raining crosses into opposition areas.
Click to expand...

I was making a case for Carroll as he was being dismissed far too easily. I too think Welbeck would be better, and I'm hoping he has a great tournament.

You just gave a good account for why you think Welbeck should play, no need to dismiss Carroll as a 'poor footballer' when he's been chosen in the squad and has a realistic chance at starting and a fair case for it is all I'm saying.
 
I'm always right said:
I want names Brwned. Names of players on the same/similar level as Carroll, so don't give me Bierhoff or Vieri.

I remember the worst German team in history used Jancker.

Welbeck should play ahead of Carroll, no question. And the reason? Because Carroll is a poor footballer.
Click to expand...

There are no players of a similar level, because England are a notably worse football team than any of those in question and have been for decades. Guivarc'h was a laughing stock for France, as was Serginho for Brazil, Iaquinta played ahead of Del Piero...yet they're still a level above Carroll, so apparently my argument falls down there. You've completely blown it apart, or something. It's taking the argument off on a tangent though, just for petty point scoring. 'See, see, I told you, you can't think of a worse striker than Carroll!'.

My point had nothing to do with ability and everything to do with style. I was simply saying they wouldn't be the only team to pick a target man ahead of a better, more technical forward as it fit the team shape better. Welbeck's the better forward, yes. And he's technically a lot better. No-one disputes this, I was never arguing otherwise. I was just arguing against the idea that picking a target man ahead of a technically gifted forward was not simply something the Neanderthals at the FA would do. And that Welbeck would be one of the first names on the teamsheet. I wasn't arguing against the idea Welbeck should start ahead of him.

Carroll's a much better target man than Crouch or Holt as far as I'm concerned. That's not saying a lot though.
 
Vidic_In_Moscow said:
You just gave a good account for why you think Welbeck should play, no need to dismiss Carroll as a 'poor footballer' when he's been chosen in the squad and has a realistic chance at starting and a fair case for it is all I'm saying.
Click to expand...

My opinion is that Carroll is nowhere near good enough to play for Liverpool and nowhere near good enough to play for England. Call it what you like, that's what I believe. And fwiw, I thought the same when Michael Ricketts got a cap for England.
 
Brwned said:
My point had nothing to do with ability and everything to do with style. I was simply saying they wouldn't be the only team to pick a target man ahead of a better, more technical forward as it fit the team shape better. Welbeck's the better forward, yes. And he's technically a lot better. No-one disputes this, I was never arguing otherwise. I was just arguing against the idea that picking a target man ahead of a technically gifted forward was not simply something the Neanderthals at the FA would do. And that Welbeck would be one of the first names on the teamsheet. I wasn't arguing against the idea Welbeck should start ahead of him.
Click to expand...

And our point is, we agree that a team sometimes should pick a target man over a better, more technical forward .

The problem is Andy Carroll. It's not Vieri vs. Del Piero or Zlatan vs. Larsson.
 
kouroux said:
It was terrible.He had a few good early games but ultimately he was out of his depth at international level.On top of that he got really fat and has become really injury prone
Click to expand...

Which kinda agrees with my point, target men are great for certain teams, I mean, just look at Bierhoff with Germany. But it's important that the target man is a good player too, otherwise you end up with a Gignac/France or Jancker/Germany scenario.
 
Sam said:
Sums up the backwards fecking thinking of the English game that Carroll is considered anywhere near good enough.
Click to expand...

I still don't see the relevance of this comment then. The backwards fecking thinking seemed to be a reference to favouring physique over technique. That's the age-old complaint, but I was just saying in this particular case physique over technique isn't something only England do, but all of the top nations have done at one point or another.

Andy Carroll's not good enough for England, we'll leave it at that.
 
I'm always right said:
And our point is, we agree that a team sometimes should pick a target man over a better, more technical forward .

The problem is Andy Carroll. It's not Vieri vs. Del Piero or Zlatan vs. Larsson.
Click to expand...

correct, it is Carroll Vs. Crouch Vs. Holt.

Personally, I think a big target man should realise that is what they are and put their weight about when the time comes and unsettle defences. Carroll is the best one out of all 3 so if we are going to take one it might as well be him.
 
Watching him today, what I saw anyway, I just found myself thinking. fecking hell, this boy is an actual footballer. Like a proper one who passes the ball and makes intelligent runs and holds up the ball and has technique. The difference in quality between him and Carroll is huge. Gigantic. But Carroll is a proper English forward, he'll get the nod.
 
I am honestly flabbergasted that we are even in some sort of position whereby a debate has arisen as to who should be starting for England out of Welbeck and Carroll. It is so far beyond retarded that Carroll is anywhere near the England team after this season, never mind that he is in contention to be starting ahead of someone like Welbeck.

Great finish from Welbeck today. He's going to be absolutely top drawer. :D
 
The fact that there is even a possibility that Andy Carroll might start ahead of Welbeck is a fecking disgrace.

If the pikey does start against France then I am done with England until the cnuts in charge are gone. I'm serious.
 
I_live_cement said:
The fact that there is even a possibility that Andy Carroll might start ahead of Welbeck is a fecking disgrace.

If the pikey does start against France then I am done with England until the cnuts in charge are gone. I'm serious.
Click to expand...

Yep. Couldn't agree more.

Any other country would be singing Welbecks praises and saying how lucky we are to have a player like him coming through in Rooney's absence. Carroll would be the backup player, if he is lucky and not taken seriously. Kind of the way Leon Britton is now. Personally, I'd have Britton in ahead of Henderson.

The trouble with Henderson is that we know he is shite now. He's young, but he's definitely shite. We are going to be having the same dispairing conversations about him in 6 or 8 years time as we are having about Downing now. Why is he still around, why do people keep picking him?!
 
God shout RE: Britton. My only question mark against him would be weather or not his performences are because of the system he plays in and weather or not games would just pass him by with our patented HOOFball.

He should be in there for my money though, him, Parker and Gerrard with Welbeck flanked by Young and a decent right winger would work well until Rooney comes back in.

It would of course be miles better if we had Carrick but that has been done to death.

Token on topic EDIT : Welbeck is good.
 
So happy for him, good to see the United boys doing the business for England, further strengthening the fact that there should be more of them there! He's been unlucky with a few chips for us in games, so it's something he obviously has in his locker, lets see it next season!
 
Pexbo said:
Watching him today, what I saw anyway, I just found myself thinking. fecking hell, this boy is an actual footballer. Like a proper one who passes the ball and makes intelligent runs and holds up the ball and has technique. The difference in quality between him and Carroll is huge. Gigantic. But Carroll is a proper English forward, he'll get the nod.
Click to expand...

I totally agree Pex.

All season I have thought this. He's a footballer. He's not feck thumpingly big and monstering opponents. He's not blindingly quick and leaving them for dead, he's not even a deadly poacher.

He's just an all-round classic forward. Touch, vision, pace and agility in all the right places and a football brain.

People hardly rate him. (Or people I know anyway) I've watched him all season and just thought to myself 'he's just such a natural footballer, smarter not harder'. England needs more of these players because it's not always about brute strength and their weaknesses have not always been about 'a big man' and 'hoof ball'. It's been about having deeper player who aren't confident one on one in midfield under pressure. I mean I love Carrick but when he's put on the boiler his constant go to move is the pass out of trouble he rarely utilises the ball at feet to release any pressure.

This is what I see in the current English setup. All run and gun football and all about getting the ball forward and overloading the box with little emphasis on patience. Having players who enjoy and excel with the ball at their feet and drawing and passing and beating men.

When you guys were talking about Carroll earlier I think a large part of his ineptness comes from the service. I mean he's a shite footballer but when you lump it at him he's pointless. When you play in and around him he gets exposed as technically not that great. I think this is where Welbeck SHOULD be selected. He's got an all-round game that eclipses all the stand-out abilities of all the forwards in the setup.

If he doesn't at least play 3 games in the group I will be very disappointed. Again shaking my head at the ridiculousness of the England setup.
 
duffer said:
He' be doing very well to play more then 3 games in the group.
Click to expand...

If they play like dung and go out then fair enough. But if he plays 3 in the group and they move beyond it I'd expect 3 in the group and whatever knockout games come his way.
 
Welbeck should start, but I am not opposed to having Carroll on the bench.

He is not just a donkey, and his size could come in handy against certain countries.
 
Looks like most of you forgot about who are we talking when we say Andy Carroll:

 
I've said it on here before, Danny Welbeck will be a world star in 2 years time, he's got absolutely everything and I've no doubt he'll work his arse off to bring it all to the fore

That Carroll could well start ahead of him for the national team speaks volumes about ingerlunds antiquated approach to the game and I for one hope they fall flat on their faces should they make such an appalling decision
 
Going to be an absolutely huge game for him today. If rumours are correct he may be up top on his own with Young in behind him, and will need to keep the French defence occupied while also making sure to hassle them when they are on the ball. Luckily Welbeck had a great work ethic so I'm sure he will do well
 
Absolutely delighted for him, the progress he has made in last twelve months has been brilliant.
 
Red_Aaron said:
I've said it on here before, Danny Welbeck will be a world star in 2 years time, he's got absolutely everything and I've no doubt he'll work his arse off to bring it all to the fore

That Carroll could well start ahead of him for the national team speaks volumes about ingerlunds antiquated approach to the game and I for one hope they fall flat on their faces should they make such an appalling decision
Click to expand...

I'm with you on this one. Unfortunately a lot of people seem to be sleeping on him somewhat and just don't see it.
 
I think there is alot to Danny's game. I think he'll be a quality footballer for years to come...with the potential to be a world class performer.
 
Welbeck is fantastic but he still has plenty to do in the coming years if he wants to be one of the best around. Next year we need a bit more end product with continued hard work from this year.
 
evra said:
I think he is absolute quality, the best striker to come through our academy in ages.
Click to expand...

One of the best strikers to come through any English academy for ages.
Pace merchants (Owen, Agbonlahor), physical freaks (Heskey and Crouch for differing reasons) and good finishers (Fowler) are 'easy' to produce.
Producing a player with actual ability beyond finishing is different. Suggests a lot of work has gone into Welbeck and we are now seeing it.
In my 20 years watching football, no-one has produced anything like Welbeck.
Overall he could be the best.
 
Would be delighted if he starts. If he performs well, maybe England could actually get through and we might see both him and Rooney in the later stages :drool:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.