England Golden Generation myth.

FootballHQ said:
Lennon was in the 2006 squad IIRC. Joe Cole I think was sort of deployed as left sided attacker in the front 3. He'd have done far better a decade later with people seeing what Spain were deploying and imitating that. Scored that nice goal v Sweden.

It would've just been better having Gerrard as the roaming right sided attacker with Hargreaves/Carrick-Lampard central and then him coming inside when out of possession.

This is what happened at Liverpool with Benitez playing Mascherano-Alonso central.
Click to expand...

That is such a good point about that Benitez side.

Gerrard was a great player undoubtedly, and a brilliant attacking CM. Was a great 10 type behind Torres and Suarez. Did great things from the right too…

But just for the sake of argument, let’s just say prime Zidane and Robben joined that Liverpool midfield you mention for the CAM and RW positions.

If you replace alonso or Mascherano with Gerard, you make the team weaker in my eyes.

Whereas Scholes could come in and replace Alonso and you would barely notice a difference.

Appreciate this is very off topic, but your comment perfectly encapsulates the weakness of Gerard at CM for me.
 
sammyhol said:
Gerrard was a great player undoubtedly, and a brilliant attacking CM. Was a great 10 type behind Torres and Suarez. Did great things from the right too…
Click to expand...
Gerrard was a very good regista for 2013 Liverpool side, but obviously he was a completely different player to his 2006 version and it's not like even that version of him would be a perfect solution to 2006's England problems.
 
Lemoor said:
Gerrard was a very good regista for 2013 Liverpool side, but obviously he was a completely different player to his 2006 version and it's not like even that version of him would be a perfect solution to 2006's England problems.
Click to expand...

It might just be my united bias…

But I just never quite saw it with Gerard as an elite DLP even in that 2013 side. Some great 60 yd pingers no doubt. But he never developed the metronomic passing ability of a Kroos, Rodri, Xavi, Busquests, etc… and definitely in my eyes didn’t develop the skill set to anywhere near the level Scholes did when he dropped deeper in his later years.

I’d argue that he never reached carrick levels.
 
Lemoor said:
I just don't see how it can be a glaring weakness then. Apart from Spain none of those teams have a better midfield than England, and those are generally the strongest points of those teams. Spain is obviously an exception, but it does seem like this is the only aspect where they are amazingly stacked.
As amazing as Kroos and Modric are, they obviously have their weaknesses that their teammates have to pick up too.
Click to expand...
But they have a player who is very good at passing at the heart of everything. Our midfield is good on paper but unbalanced.
 
sammyhol said:
But I just never quite saw it with Gerard as an elite DLP even in that 2013 side. Some great 60 yd pingers no doubt. But he never developed the metronomic passing ability of a Kroos, Rodri, Xavi, Busquests, etc… and definitely in my eyes didn’t develop the skill set to anywhere near the level Scholes did when he dropped deeper in his later years.

I’d argue that he never reached carrick levels.
Click to expand...
I'd agree. Kroos, Rodri, Xavi, Busquets are (or will likely be) in the best of all time discussion in their positions. Carrick in last Sir Alex season was among the best in the world, Gerrard in that side was a fair bit below that, but for national team level this was more than enough and at that point he had skill set that was sorely lacked for the 2006 england national team.
 
FootballHQ said:
The biggest problem in the "Golden Generation" era was the straightjacket 4-4-2 that Sven constantly implemented. I think he only briefly changed to a 4-1-4-1 for second part of 2006 World cup.

Another big problem was also trying to shoe horn Beckham in when he was past his peak around 2004/05. Can remember England trying him out as a deep lying CM for a few games and it didn't really work (one was losing to Northern Ireland in a qualifier).

4-3-3 would've been far better. It was what Mourinho played at Chelsea as soon as he came in and Benitez eventually changed Liverpool's structure and moved Gerrard out wide or as support striker.

Hargreaves, Carrick and Barry were all available as defensive midfielders but barely used in major tournaments.

Think England's best chance in that time was 2002 World cup. 1-0 up v Brazil and the path would've been Turkey in SF and then Germany in final who England had beaten 5-1 less than a year before.
Click to expand...

Paul Robinson did a podcast interview this week that said the exact same thing as this.
 
Doracle said:
The squad is stronger now but that mid 00s team probably had a better 11 - despite a weakness at left wing (ironically a similar problem to this England team without Rashford) . A combined team would be something like:

Pickford

Walker
Ferdinand
Terry
Cole

Rice
Carrick

Beckham
Rooney
Foden

Kane
Click to expand...

No way Rice would start ahead of Gerrard or Scholes
 
Mismanagement of Scholes; that was really the problem with this era. It’s partially why he quit the national team and why managers after Sven begged that he come out of retirement. Leave it to England to fail to utilize the genius of Scholes.
 
arnie_ni said:
Not in the position he or Bellingham played. So were would Bellingham be if Scholes wasn't even in the centre?
Click to expand...
Well Scholes should have been in the centre and Lampard or Gerrard should have either been dropped or pushed forward.

Not one English player in that squad had the season Bellingham has just had so for me Rooney and Bellingham would have been the first names on the sheet of that team.

I'm not saying Bellingham is as good as the other midfielders in terms of their careers, it's way too early to say but if he continues the way he's going, he'll surpass them all.
 
giorno said:
Yes, the 2006 version was more balanced, but crucially lacked depth in the most important role - striker

Doing the combined XI game mine would be something like

Pickford
TAA-Rio-Terry-Cole
Carrick-Rice-Gerrard-Bellingham/Saka/Beckham
Kane-Rooney/Foden/Saka/Bellingham

Box midfield, left wing still weak but you just overload the right, which is exceptional, and Cole has the pace, stamina and aptitude to push up and stretch play and you can always have one of Gerrard/Jude/Foden/Rooney/Beckham moving wider to exploit the weak side once you've forced the defence to overcommit on the right side
Click to expand...

Sorry you'd pick Bellingham over Rooney? :lol:

Give it 5 years and you can make the comparison maybe.

And as for Foden and Saka, FFS :lol:
 
Imagine Sven being able to leave Rashford and Grealish at home instead of like Vassell, Bent and Defoe (still a hysterically bad decision when both Owen and Rooney were barely fit, but still).

But either way, both generations success or lack of is essentially heavily tied to their main cogs fitness. Southgate has had no injury concerns from Kane.
 
Zen said:
Imagine Sven being able to leave Rashford and Grealish at home instead of like Vassell, Bent and Defoe (still a hysterically bad decision when both Owen and Rooney were barely fit, but still).

But either way, both generations success or lack of is essentially heavily tied to their main cogs fitness. Southgate has had no injury concerns from Kane.
Click to expand...
Unbalanced teams trying to force in as many star players as possible.
 
Hammondo said:
Unbalanced teams trying to force in as many star players as possible.
Click to expand...

Which ones?

2004 maybe, but it's essentially the only time they forced Gerrard, Lampard and Scholes together like that and well, it worked... until Rooney's injury, but even then, they should have won that game. Sol's goal was perfectly fine. No Rooney injury, they win that tournament for me and many others, but definitely make the semi's. He likely would have moved towards a 451 in the semi.

2006... dunno, this is more a selection issue, should never have taken both Owen and Rooney, if either, but the consensus was, half-fit of those were better than starting Crouch-Bent/Defoe etc, but obviously he shouldn't be dropping those guys for Walcott who he had zero intention of using. He played a 451 in the knockouts, which everyone wanted, and it barely worked, mostly because the 1 was a half fit Rooney.... again, fit Rooney, and I'm comfortably in thinking they beat Portugal.

I definitely think if Kane had the same injury issues, Southgates record wouldn't be as good either, all while having better fixtures.
 
This current generation of England are better than the "golden generation". So much talent back then, but, imo, a squad of individuals rather than playing for each other, hence why the squad achieved so little. I have faith in this generation of players.
 
The common theme between all these highly squads is that they’re all poorly managed. Hoddle, Sven and now Southgate…fukking hell. Each squad had/has holes, but they all had/have incredible strengths too, but their managers have done them in with poor management.
 
TwoSheds said:
Sorry you'd pick Bellingham over Rooney? :lol:

Give it 5 years and you can make the comparison maybe.

And as for Foden and Saka, FFS :lol:
Click to expand...

Is that what he even said?

It reads as the players on the left of each line with the "-" in between as being the starters. The ones on the right with the "/" being alternatives, subs or to be used for tactical shifts. He has Rooney starting with Kane as far as I see it.
 
Beckham was the biggest problem with that team and why Scholes ended up being wasted. You had Scholes who could control games and provide intelligent use of possession but instead of building around that it was Beckham and his constant long balls. Also infected Gerrard with that, so for years you had an England team who had the players to play a possession game and control matches actually playing a lot of what was effectively long ball. Scholes ended up chasing second balls and looking to attack the box, getting judged on how many goals he was scoring and was eventually pushed out by Lampard, the younger and more mobile player.
 
Overall the old team was better but we were lacking the right manager to find the tactic that would work and become too obsessed with trying to fit all the best players in the team even if they didn't compliment each other.

The most exciting part of the current team is the number of goals they scored this season. The likes of Kane, Bellingham, Foden, Palmer, Saka and a few others could bring a lot of goals. That being said the defence is a bit shaky especially with Shaw not fully fit a d the midfield lacks a bit of depth.
 
Lemoor said:
Gerrard was a very good regista for 2013 Liverpool side, but obviously he was a completely different player to his 2006 version and it's not like even that version of him would be a perfect solution to 2006's England problems.
Click to expand...

England tried him there in 2014 and it was so bad. Ultimate transition tournament for England where they were still trying to eek up the last tournament drops from Gerrard and Rooney but neither could quite make an impact at highest level and some of the younger players weren't quite ready or good enough like Sturridge, Barkley, Sterling etc.

Jagielka, Cahill and Baines in that defence. Both were very solid and dependable prem players but just couldn't step up to internationals and Italy and Uruguay exposed that weakness in the tournament so can see the same happening with Guehi and Dunk if he's called upon.
 
arnie_ni said:
When he was shunted out to left wing and then packed it in
Click to expand...

I think Scholes had gone about 20 odd games without scoring and he was seen as attacking midfielder in that time. A year or two before when you signed RVN and Veron you went 4-5-1 and Scholes got in as the support striker and it was Keane and Veron as the two CMs.

Scholes then had the eye issue that kept him out for nearly a season and when he came back SAF had the foresight to play him deeper with Carrick and it was very very good for a couple of seasons.

That would've actually been a DLP combination that would've done well at say Euro 2008 but of course England hilarious failed to even quality. Capello then tried to get Scholes out of retirement for 2010 World cup but he didn't want to. Carrick also dropped and IIRC it was a similar feeling to Ben White, he didn't want to spend weeks away from family with no guarantee of playing.

Look back to the infamous Croatia game and how bad the ball retention was in that midfield. All of Gerrard, Lampard and Joe Cole were out there that night but Croatia with young Modric ran rings round England in the first half.

At least since that night there was restructure in youth set ups and a few more proficient technical midfielders like Foden, Grealish been produced but still tendency to want to play them as far up the pitch as possible. Milan recasting Pirlo deeper when he was still early 20s shows it can be done.
 
06 squad every single position had a world class level player.
 
lex talionis said:
The common theme between all these highly squads is that they’re all poorly managed. Hoddle, Sven and now Southgate…fukking hell. Each squad had/has holes, but they all had/have incredible strengths too, but their managers have done them in with poor management.
Click to expand...

A Mourinho managing them in that time and yeah England make at least a final and probably win a tournament in the 2000s. Nearly happened in 2007 before Capello was appointed.
 
Lemoor said:
By what definition of world class?
Click to expand...

Name recognition obviously.

Cole, Terry, Rio, Gerrard and Lampard were otherwise the world class players in reality.

Neville, Beckham, Rooney and Owen sure... but given their fitness, and where Becks and Owen were at this point, not really.

Kane, Bellingham, Foden, Stones, Walker, Saka and Rice... all fit and potential to be Ballon d'Or nominees this year.
 
Offside said:
06 squad every single position had a world class level player.
Click to expand...
I agree. If you made a world XI at that time, it would be England's formation, although Dinho on Joe Cole's place wouldn't be absurd.
 
sammyhol said:
It might just be my united bias…

But I just never quite saw it with Gerard as an elite DLP even in that 2013 side. Some great 60 yd pingers no doubt. But he never developed the metronomic passing ability of a Kroos, Rodri, Xavi, Busquests, etc… and definitely in my eyes didn’t develop the skill set to anywhere near the level Scholes did when he dropped deeper in his later years.

I’d argue that he never reached carrick levels.
Click to expand...

He could never pass or create like Carrick, but physically he was considerably better IMHO. But, note we have to talk about ‘peak’ Gerrard whereas no one really does with Carrick. Carrick had a game that could be executed at age 24, and at 34. Gerard very much couldn’t maintain how physical his game needed to be, to be considered genuinely world class.
 
Chipper said:
Is that what he even said?

It reads as the players on the left of each line with the "-" in between as being the starters. The ones on the right with the "/" being alternatives, subs or to be used for tactical shifts. He has Rooney starting with Kane as far as I see it.
Click to expand...

Is that any less daft? Saka up front?
 
TwoSheds said:
Sorry you'd pick Bellingham over Rooney? :lol:

Give it 5 years and you can make the comparison maybe.

And as for Foden and Saka, FFS :lol:
Click to expand...
Over 2006 Rooney, and not necessarily
 
Chipper said:
Is that what he even said?

It reads as the players on the left of each line with the "-" in between as being the starters. The ones on the right with the "/" being alternatives, subs or to be used for tactical shifts. He has Rooney starting with Kane as far as I see it.
Click to expand...
No, the / means they're interchangeable, as in pick whoever you prefer
 
This current England-squad is nowhere near the best England squads.

There are 5-6 players of the highest quality - but the team is so horribly unbalanced it's almost laughable.
You can't compare the current central defenders to Adams, Pallister, Keown, Campbell, Wright, Ferdinand, Terry, Parker, Butcher etc

And yes you have 2 good strikers today - but 20-30 years ago you had 3-4 high quality strikers who didn't even make the squad - and that was after brilliant seasons, not after a Rashford-season
 
Wumminator said:
This current England team (of the last five years or so) is the best England team that there has ever been.

There's two England players who are in the running for the B'allon Dor and the top players in La Liga, Bundesliga and Prem are English players.
Click to expand...

You are so-so-so wrong - how can you even make a claim like that when you look at the defenders they have got. Imagine this team with Stones, Pickford, Kane and Rice injured or suspended - that is how paper-thin it is
 
lysglimt said:
You are so-so-so wrong - how can you even make a claim like that when you look at the defenders they have got. Imagine this team with Stones, Pickford, Kane and Rice injured or suspended - that is how paper-thin it is
Click to expand...

Compared to what? Collapsing on the back of a Rooney injury 3 times?
 
giorno said:
No, the / means they're interchangeable, as in pick whoever you prefer
Click to expand...

Then apologies to @TwoSheds

I'm also a bit disappointed. :lol: Made sense to me if it was as an alternative look to the 4-2-2-2 box you were talking about, with tactical shifts to 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1 but not Foden, Saka and Bellingham as candidates for one or both of the front 2 positions. I'd have thought they'd all be better operating in the attacking midfield line.
 
I think England spent years with average players and when a good generation came along they were treated like gold. Plus, it was right around the time the EPL exploded and became Europe's top league.

There were some very talented players, indeed, but it was a slow and unbalanced team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.