@joseph

Am not trying to take anything away from teams' achievements. Just wanted to put
things into perspective, that success is made up of various factors, and not just the
most obvious ones.

My team won the EPL some 16 years ago. They had an excellent season, no doubt,
with a certain Alan Shearer banging in his customary 30+ goals.

But apart from that, I'll gladly admit that my team's title win was in fact, greatly
helped by one Crystal Palace fan, Matthew Simmons - the guy who taunted Eric
Cantona as he headed to the tunnel after getting sent off.

The infamous kung-fu kick, which resulted in a lengthy ban, was like a lottery to
Blackburn's chances. For I don't see them winning the title had Cantona been able
to play in Man Utd's other games during the title run-in.

Funny how a few insults from a another team's fan, could have such an impact on
the title race.

@mysharona

I was thinking for a medium/long term future and Zamora is already 30. Bent would
be the closest to replicate the Rooney + Hernandez partnership. Carroll could be a
good option on the bench. I don't rate him yet. He's had a decent championship with
Newcastle and a good run in the first half of the EPL. Would need to perform at a
higher level with Liverpool.

And where would you put Wilshere? He plays in a doubt pivot at Arsenal, where he
takes turns going forward with Alex Song, but more often then not, he pushes
forward while Song holds and combines with Cesc and Nasri. The times he played as
the main playmaker didn't work.

And Huddlestone needs to get a good run of games plus be more disciplined with his
passing. Whether it's Redknapp that asks him to hit it long to the flanks all the time
or if it's his inability to keep possession I have no clue.

Dawson is a good choice too.

@emma9

One of the reasons football is so fantastic. Being such a low scoring game, details
can decide games. But of course you can't diminish the feats and accomplishments of
teams, they don't happen by chance.

Well Joseph, you're one of the few sensible ones around. Most football fans aren't
like that, and are often blinded by hyperbole.

When their team accomplishes a feat, they profess it to be something superhuman
that no one else can match. Often forgetting certain pivotal moments favouring
them, that had it gone the other way, could have resulted in a very different
outcome.

Man Utd's 19th title is a good example. You'll find many saying that, that title makes
them the best team in England ever, like no one else ever came close. But is that an
accurate reflection?

Had it not been for Benitez's infamous 'facts' meltdown several years ago, or
Chelsea's capitulation around Christmas this season, the title count could have
stood at Liverpool 19 and Man Utd 18 or 17, today.

@joseph

bent? BENT?!?!?!

zamora has only had one cap and has performed better in an england shirt
and carroll should be ahead of bent too
bring owen back, even just to bring on with 10 minutes left to poach a goal!!!!

i dont like wilshere deep like that alongside carrick, he should be further forward

and carrick should be replaced by huddlestone

terry and ferdinand are fading and i agree smalling and jones look good. why not
dawson in there too

Any team that goes unbeaten for 49 games relies on SOME luck.


And it's not like United's penalty was a stonewall one...

Well, bringing up Arsenal's unbeaten year, it is important to remember a few things.

The moment Van Nistelrooy's last minute spotkick hit the crossbar, denying Man Utd
the points in their encounter.

Several occasions when Arsenal's players went down theatrically in the penalty box
during the dying moments of the game, Pires in particular, earning them last minute
penalties to get a draw, when they otherwise would have lost.

The side of 2003/04 was a great team, no doubts about that.
But it's worth remembering that lady luck and refereeing decisions played a pivotal
role in them being unbeaten, and it wasn't all just down to superhuman footballing
skills.

@clemo: you forget about that year Arsenal did not lose a game in the EPL. I know it
seems like a century ago now ;) and dont forget Mou's Chelsea.

I'm looking forward to Phil Jones' England debut too.

But it's up front where I'm most concerned. Apart from Andy Carroll, I just don't see
any young players coming through that could potentially set the world alight.

No doubt there's some players that are chosen purely on reputation, but Lampard
scored 27 goals for Chelsea in the 2009-2010 season, Rooney scored 34, Gerrard is
one of the few really creative english players.

Give a chance to someone new? Sure, but stick them into an unbalanced system and
an unnatural position and you will have the same problems.

It persisted through the years because both Eriksson and McLaren were rubbish.
Even if part of the equation of rubbishness is/was indeed complacency, the majority
of the blame surely goes to the managers that can't find suitable systems.

Take Barry for example. He's great on the ball and a good technical player, but
asking him to play as the deepest midfielder is ludicrous, he just isn't good enough
defensively(neither is Gerrard). All that was fine when England had to play weaker
teams in the qualifiers and with Man. City he plays with a destroyer alongside him(De
Jong) but since the only english ball-winner (Hargreaves) is never going to be fit, he
got a lot of the blame for England's loss. Surely there was a need to play him
alongside Carrick:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6jqE4rMejw

If you'd ask me, I would set up something like:

----------------------Bent-----------------------
----A.Young-------Rooney-----Lennon------
-----------Wilshere--------Carrick-------------
Cole/Baines--Terry--Ferdinand--Jonhson/Kelly

Phil Jones and Smalling could be a great partnership for the future in defense too.

Joseph,

What I'm trying to get at, is that England's team, in recent years, have often been
selected based on reputations or sentiment.

There are some players who have been clearly below their best for quite some time,
yet are still a permanent fixture in the first 11. At the same time, others who have
been on good form for their clubs, get ignored, simply because they play for smaller
teams, or may not be as glamourous as the established stars.

The lack of competition for places makes these multi-millionaires complacent, and
such a situation is hurting the England team's chances of success, as shown by the
failure to qualify for Euro 2008 and the pathetic display at World Cup 2010.

Sure, even big stars have off days, like Messi and co. in the 4-0 drubbing by
Germany. That can be forgiven. But England's case is a rather different story.

It's not a one-off, rather some poor form that has been going on for quite some
time. Clearly, something isn't working, and some changes are needed to freshen
things up.

A coach should decide on a system, and then select the most *suitable* 11 men that
is able to play that system. Unfortunately for England's case, they seem to select
their best 11, and try to make them fit into the system instead.

Take the times when Gerrard was thrown onto the left wing, not his natural
position. Lampard had to play, but so too did Gerrard, there was no leaving either of
them out. The only vacancy was on the wing, so he got dumped there instead.

If a team containing Messi, Tevez, Mascherano, Cambiasso, etc, fails to perform and
stutters game after game after game, at some point the coach has to change things.
He has to be bold enough to say, I don't care how great your reputation is, if you
don't perform after so many chances, or can't fit into my system, I'm giving a chance
to someone new.

I'm afraid I don't see Capello doing that anytime soon. He is content to pick the
same bunch of underperforming players, stick them in game after game, and hope
that they'll eventually come good.