I think the problem with Rooney is that he was playing at such a young age, Moyes, I am actually going to praise him here, didn't overplay him. However Rooney's impatience to play led to him coming to us. The cost of the transfer made it that he had to be played. If he had been coming through our own system, he would have been used more sparingly. I think he is still a good player but he reached his peak a lot earlier than most players. There is no way in hell he will play as long as Giggs. I actually think that by the time he is in his early 30's he will be a bit part player. His own impatience may lead to his own downfall. Sometimes you have to realise that managers are doing things for your benefit.
Wayne Rooney | 2012-14 Performances
- Thread starter gooDevil
- Start date
- Status
So you think the reason we may go home early is because Rooney hasn't been deployed as striker, rather than defensive frailties or the lack of time to build up momentum?
And of course Roy does have players he sees as integral to success, only they are Sturridge and Sterling with a dash of Welbeck perhaps.
Might i enquire as to who was the United scapegoat at Euro 2012 or SA2010?
Now this isn't to say that Rooney didn't take his share of criticism in either case, however he wa hardly front and centre being designated as the villain of the piece.
No one outside of England can understand what England is doing with Rooney. Yet, England overrate themselves and think they stand a chance... It's funny to see that from out side every 2 years at the tournaments
He should be Englands star player imo. Think of him what you want, but he's still England's best player but waisted on the left. You wont get the best out of him but since England is (and has been for the last 30 years) only a decent side without many top players, this could make the difference.
Rooney is always the scapegoat, they start on him before a tournament even starts. They plant the seeds in fans minds that he isn't taking it seriously enough with his lifestyle. Then the radio start with Wayne Rooney has to deliver, why doesn't Steven Gerrard have to deliver, he has been around as long. To prolong his career I would retire if I was him. Not sure he would want to lose the endorsements but the loss of the hassle would sway it for me. Of course Mark Saggers and Co. would then say he is a coward. He can't win no matter what he does.
The object is to get the best out of the team, not Wayne Rooney.
What is this "still England's best player"? His 2014 form has been of a similarly unreliable nature no matter shirt he has been pulling on, and prior to his retirement Ashley Cole was probably the most trusted tournament campaigner.
Playing Rooney on the left does not get the best out of the team either.
Don't care too much about England, would like to see them advance over instead of one of Italy and Uruguay but I would fecking love it if Rooney scored the winner against Uruguay.
Yeah its all a big conspiracy!
Of all the players in our team Rooney least deserves this defensive protection from our fans. Rooneys performances haven't matched his image as a superstar for a while now for club but especially country, that's why he's getting criticized.
You kinda need to read the whole discussion from the start, not just one post, to get what i am on about.
I'd argue that a pre-tournament trip to Vegas represented more than ample fertiliser to those concerns.
Rooney was but one part of the 2010 reaction, you had:
Capello
The disallowed goal.
Gareth Barry.
Most of the team seen as performing poorly from the first minute against the US.
2012:
Too defensive against Italy.
Yet another lost penalty shoot-out.
Ashley Young/James Milner
Undesirable preparation for the Euros themselves.
To be fair to Gerrard i thought that he had a fairly decent Euros, admittedly there was not a great deal to his credit beforehand or against Italy at the weekend. There were some signs of criticism at the weekend although ny no means as vocal as those directed at Rooney [partly out of futility perhaps because the captaincy means that he will start].
Seemingly not [which is a pity], although Roy didn't want to just drop him without first seeking an alternative role if one could be found. If Sturridge is fit he starts as No 9, beyond that it is a question of who is the most dynamic No 10, fleet of both foot as well as mind.
What does 'he should be England's star player mean?'. If he was/is - then he should go out and be such. He has no automatic right to be the centre-piece of the team. He isn't England's only good player. He is a striker. Well so is Sturridge. How far back would Rooney have to go in order to justify being picked ahead of Studge? After all, Studge has been playing for years too, and quite simply, when he was not a better centre forward than Rooney, he wasn't being picked for England ahead of him. That's how it works. For the last 18 months, he has been the better striker.
As for the 10 role, this isn't a new debate. All season on here, many have argued that it should be Rooney or Persie, with Mata or Shinji in the 10 role. Again, Rooney will struggle to argue that he deserves to start ahead of Sterling.
If he ends this tournament out of the England XI, which he should in my opinion as he isn't their best option in either role right now, then that would make his last deal with us look even more ludicrous.
I'm not trying to slag him, he's not rubbish or anything - but calling a spade a spade, he shouldn't play ahead of Studge or Sterling. Studge has already scored more WC finals goals than him in only one game.
We should talk about the really important issues... like how hilarious this corner was:
Still, it could be worse....
(was this a simple excuse to re-post a gif of Iago Aspas' corner I hear you ask? .... yes, yes it was)
Still, it could be worse....
(was this a simple excuse to re-post a gif of Iago Aspas' corner I hear you ask? .... yes, yes it was)
To an extent. Although I remember back then, there was quite a big clamour for Rooney to be dropped and replaced by 'the superior' Andy Carroll, in the same way some people now want him dropped and replaced by Lambert/Lallana/Oxlade-Chamberlain.
You have to remember that Rooney has been the most high profile player at the country's most hated football club for years now. He's had bags of success, and scored goals against just about every other club going.
Consequently, there are an awful lot of rival fans out there who despise him, and will never - ever - give him a fair crack of the whip. It's not just a conspiracy, or United fans being overly defensive, to say he is unfairly singled out every fecking time. I've even seen some Liverpool fans conceding as much over the last few days.
The England team is a circus anyway, and Rooney is Custard Pie Receptacle-In-Chief.
I supported them as a kid (look at my username), and loved the romance around them going into major tournaments.
Now I just think the hysterical press reaction around them, allied with the fact that they're followed by so many utter bellwhiffs, has completely ruined it.
Last edited:
I agree he has to step up for England in a final tournaments, but Rooney scored not against Andorra, he had vital goals against Poland, Montenegro, sides that were in direct competition with England for a WC spot.
As for MU he always delivered in big games. So there is no issue here. Even this season, it's not Rooney who has not scored, it's a team. In fact both goals against top sides, RVP header from Rooney's corner and Rooney FK both involved him, from set-pieces, but still. So even in that respect, small one labeit, rooney still did as best as you can hope really. And in England's case the situation is actually similar. Think about it. How many goals England has scored? 6 in 2006 WC in 5 matches. And then 3 goals in 4 games in 2010. So while Rooney's record is poor and he has to share blame for dreadful performances, you can easily make a case that England's attacking play was pretty much diabolical partly because of Rooney, but only partly. You look at Messi and he scored two goals in 9 matches or something, while Argentina actually scored shitload of goals compared to England. Just last Cup they scored 10.
Anyone with a proper reading skills, who would read the conversation from the start as I pointed out, could understand that was meant us a joke, mocking earlier post of Hannibal about Rooney being "national embarrassment". Well anyone apart from self-righteous pricks really.
All this number 10 talk is useless really. Who is City's number 10? Silva? When they are in full strength, he is often deployed on the side. And he played there more matches than in the middle.
Rooney is a forward, not a midfielder, that's the main thing. People keep assuming that number 10 is midfielder, i don't think it's right, for me, it's a role not a position and for me iconic number 10s are not the likes of Zidane or Ballack, who i think were a AMs, but forwards like Totti, Baggio, Bergkamp. I mean creative forwards, those who can equally assist a goal and score it. And in that respect Rooney is a number 10 for me. He is a forward-number 10. Now it's a manager's job to deploy him correctly. It can be done obviously, Fergie managed to fit in him, Ronaldo and Tevez somehow. I don't think Rooney is a typical CF or a number 9 if you will. I mean you even look at his delivery, the number of great assists he had this season for United and many of them in top CL games as well. You don't really see Lewandowski, Mandzukic or Higuain making these crosses.
For all his average performance for England's he did assist a goal and with a great cross, not a 2 meter pass. And that best piece of delivery England had all match. Sterling's, Welbeck's, Barkley's crosses were much worse. Also his creative passing is much better than a common CF's one. So Rooney can be and should be a "creative forward" now how would you call it, number 10 or second striker or something else is hardly matter, right? The thing tactics need to be spot on. Rooney can play on the side even, if it's a forward position, not a midfielder in 4-5-1 like he was in England's last game.
To play him just as forward in the box is an option, but i don't think it's a good one, if you play like that Rooney is robbed of his creativeness, that is actually quite good, you just need to see how many assists he has over the last two years.
Agree with this.
An assist that led to a tap in goal against Italy while he wasnt playing as a striker anyway. And he doesn't go missing against the "better teams" thats rubbish.
Rooney is the best player we have. Play him as a striker and make sure he gets the service. He will score. But with the useless midfield we have I expect once we get out of the group, it will be the end.
Come back on here when you can finally get your head out of Rooney's arse. That cross would have not happened was it for the brilliant through pass by Sterling in the first place
Sterling also put a very good ball across the 6 yard box too.
And Sturridge's goal would not have happened if Rooney hadn't played a perfectly weighted and placed cross, with his weaker foot, while on the run.
Your post is another example of people going out of their way to avoid giving Rooney a shred of credit.
That an overstatement really. On abilities and skill Rooney is no better than RVP for example. Surely there are some serious question about his injuries especially now, that he is over 30, but still.
That true. So? Still it was a great cross. And other players were in good positions to produce good deliveries themselves but they failed to find the man, while Rooney did. It's not a coincidence he created more chances in the game than any other player as well.
I was talking about England.
Then it's less of a debate of course
Although if we talk about England only i think Rooney is pretty much on par with mr Slip there.
Then it's less of a debate of course
Although if we talk about England only i think Rooney is pretty much on par with mr Slip there.
No he is not. Midfield is England's problem.
Rooney's pass was clearly the more technically difficult of the two.
Sterling played better than Rooney overall but you'd have to be incredibly biased against the latter player to try and imply that goal was mainly down to the brilliance of Sterling.
welcome to the Rooney hating thread.
Or maybe you can talk sense rather than talking through your arse.
Sterling clearly had the better game. His dribbling created minor havoc and the through pass to Rooney was lovely.
That pass allowed enough time for Rooney to make a beautiful pass, using his weaker foot, to Sturridge who calmly scored via a beautifully controlled half-volley.
Its called teamwork. Everyone played a part.
That pass allowed enough time for Rooney to make a beautiful pass, using his weaker foot, to Sturridge who calmly scored via a beautifully controlled half-volley.
Its called teamwork. Everyone played a part.
Of course but as the Lord says, not all parts are created equal. Or something...
It's a matter of opinion. I think he often performed for England. Again as in Rooney's case i think G is also a bit of a victim to England's team moronic formations, tactics, etc.
That was a feckin tap-in from Sturridge. No need to be so RAWKish about it.
since the scousers got banned I suspect there are an awful lot of them posing as United supporters and signing up.
Why did the scousers get banned? Typical me has only just realised they are not about.
No its not. There's no need to compare Sterling's bad deliveries to Rooney's good delivery to Sturridge, when he was equally responsible for that goal with a brilliant weighted pass to Rooney. I'm not in favour of dropping Rooney, I just think that he should be played as a 9 in this England team
- Status