Premier league

[Boomstick]

Why can't the FA say that in the premier league, in the starting 11, 5 need to be english?

Yes it would weaken the premier league initially, but would strengthen the english side in the future.

It's a lot better than that B team rubbish!

[Jenny]

Probably isn't EU compliant for starters.

Goes against one of the 6 degrees of freedom throughout the member states.

[Wild Rover]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

[Boomstick]

Which is one of the reasons to leave the EU.

But back on topic, why the f**k doesn't Wilshire start every game. He is so technically gifted, he could be our Pirlo.

Which leads me to think there is too much emphasis on speed and power than technical ability. Look at joe cole, for example. A very skilful and technically gifted player. But has been kept out by stronger faster sluggers like Gerrard and lampard.
This would never happen in Any other country.

It all stems from the grass roots, if messi was english. He'd be playing in league 2.

[Boomstick]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

Your missing the point, in say 10 years time the team would be vastly better.
It's time to give the english lads REAL chance. aswell as promoting skill and technical ability over speed and strength.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

 
It's time to give the english lads REAL chance.

You mean like back in the 1970s? Before those bas**rds in Brussels hatched their plot to screw English football?

we had a reight good national team then, didn't we?

[Boomstick]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

 
It's time to give the english lads REAL chance.

You mean like back in the 1970s? Before those b*****ds in Brussels hatched their plot to screw English football?

we had a reight good national team then, didn't we?

Are you being funny? What are you getting at?

[BillyStubbsTears]

What I'm getting at is bleeding obvious. When we had a league that was predominantly populated by English players, our national side was f**king crap. When we had a league with a  few foreign players, our national side was f**king crap. Now we have a league with lots of foreign players, our national side is f**king crap.

There's a consistent theme going on there. And it's nothing to do with the presence or otherwise of foreign players in our league.

[Boomstick]

There is nothing consistant in the money going into football. Nowadays it's monumental, and it's about time it got spent on nurturing english talent.

Back in the 70's there was no money. Today there is bags of it. Get it spent on the english lads development.

So no, there was nothing f**king obvious in what you were saying actually.

[RedJ]

What I'm getting at is bleeding obvious. When we had a league that was predominantly populated by English players, our national side was f**king crap. When we had a league with a  few foreign players, our national side was f**king crap. Now we have a league with lots of foreign players, our national side is f**king crap.

There's a consistent theme going on there. And it's nothing to do with the presence or otherwise of foreign players in our league.

It's always been the same with foreign players. In the past it was players from the other home nations, it only seems a lot worse nowadays because you get them coming from all over the world.

[bobjimwilly]

I think you need to look at the youth squads, and making potential england players play at every level for england, not just dump them into the 1st team after one year in the under-21s. That would be as good a place to start as any...

[BillyStubbsTears]

Right. Got it.

So what you're saying is, spend all this money that the Premier League brings in on English players. Don't use it to buy in the best players from around the world? Right?

So you're Premier League ends up with the best teams not being allowed to have Suarez, Aguerro, David Luis, van Persie, Kompany, Toure etc, etc, etc.

Instead, Man City will have to make do with Rickie Lambert and Phil Jagielka for now?

I see the logic now. I'm sure that the Abu Dhabi mob will continue to pour in their billions into that squad. And I'm sure that the Chinese and Thais will still stump up to watch that quality of football on the box.

[the vicar]

There is nothing can be done as it is down to the Jean Marc Bosman ruling he took it to cort in 1995 and won

[Glyn_Wigley]

There is nothing can be done as it is down to the Jean Marc Bosman ruling he took it to cort in 1995 and won

Only if moving from one EU club to another.

[BillyStubbsTears]

What I'm getting at is bleeding obvious. When we had a league that was predominantly populated by English players, our national side was f***ing crap. When we had a league with a  few foreign players, our national side was f***ing crap. Now we have a league with lots of foreign players, our national side is f***ing crap.

There's a consistent theme going on there. And it's nothing to do with the presence or otherwise of foreign players in our league.

It's always been the same with foreign players. In the past it was players from the other home nations, it only seems a lot worse nowadays because you get them coming from all over the world.

RedJ

I hear that said a lot, but it's not true.

Look at FA Cup final squads (because it's easy to find the info on Wiki).

In the 1970s, on average, there were 14.1 English players in each final. The most was 21 in 1974/75. The least was 8 in 1978/79

In the last decade, on average, there have been 6.9 English players in each final. The most was 10 in 2007/08. The least was 3 in 2012/13.

Thing is. Around 1975, we had an England squad that was outclassed at Euro and World Cup level. Around 2013 we've had an England squad that's been outclassed at Euro and World Cup level. There's absolutely no correlation between the number of "foreign" players in the English league and the quality (sic) of the England team.

[Wild Rover]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

Your missing the point, in say 10 years time the team would be vastly better.
It's time to give the english lads REAL chance. aswell as promoting skill and technical ability over speed and strength.

No.....I am not missing the point. If ten years ago people were able to play more "English" in their teams, todays England would still be the same squad, as they are the best of that age .

[Boomstick]

Right. Got it.

So what you're saying is, spend all this money that the Premier League brings in on English players. Don't use it to buy in the best players from around the world? Right?

So you're Premier League ends up with the best teams not being allowed to have Suarez, Aguerro, David Luis, van Persie, Kompany, Toure etc, etc, etc.

Instead, Man City will have to make do with Rickie Lambert and Phil Jagielka for now?

I see the logic now. I'm sure that the Abu Dhabi mob will continue to pour in their billions into that squad. And I'm sure that the Chinese and Thais will still stump up to watch that quality of football on the box.

YES EXACTLY, you've got there in the end.

The clubs would be forced to develop english talent, instead if the easy option of buying foreign imports.
Yes it would weaken tge premier league initially, but it would grow again as the english players get better.
I'm not saying every player should be english, just 5 of the starting 11.
There will still be plenty of room for the foreign super stars.

[not on facebook]

The reason why Cant cope on thr international stage at a higher level
Is for the fact that for last 40 Odd years on the football front are national team as stayed at the same level.

The likes Of Brazil,Argentina ,germany,spain,france italy have all moved on
In various forms but all making the distant between England and them sens bigger/better.

At the same time 40 Odd years ago england were Beating teams like turkey 0-8 and other teams Such as norway,rep Ireland,poland,all african teams,USA,Australia,rest Of not mentioned european teams were Well
Behind England .

But today if england drew 0-0 in turkey that be classed as a result for us since likes Of turkey and all above nations have closed the gap on us and in most cases are level pegging if not are beyond us.

Take Australia they have gone out Of would cup after two defeats ,but after watching both Their games they looked more usefull Than what England
Served up.

The FA had got to shoulder  a big part Of the blame for This as they are all about making money and not what is best for our national game .

In my life span i Cant see england winning fcuk all,but if FA gets to gripe with things today then maybe my kids might have som'ert to watch and shout about after 2050ish

[BillyStubbsTears]

Boomstick

Liverpool are awash with England "stars". The England team last night included Gerrard, Johnson, Henderson, Sterling, Sturridge plus Lambert and Lallana. They are the very model of what you'd like to see.

Did any of those players look like anything better than first round group fodder last night?

And in the meantime, if you "weaken the Premier League initially", where do you think the money is going to come from?

[River Don]

What they need to do is sit down and look at what they're coaching the coaches and ask if it is right. Chris Waddle for one passionately believes it doesn't yet focus enough on technical skills. I think they need to consult with foreign coaches about what they believe needs to be done to develop British talent, people from places like Ajax and Barcelona.

I think we need to find a way to deliver these new ideas right down into the grass roots, to youth clubs and most importantly schools. They also need to find ways to encourage parents into the new British football.

Just my opinion like.

[Dare to dream!]

Was listening to Stuart Pearce last night and he made some good points. He was talking about putting more emphasis on the u17-u21 international teams to give them experience at that level isntead of fast tracking them straight into the senior squad. For example Ashley Cole should have been selected over Luke Shaw for this tournament and Luke Shaw should be starting for the u21 championships next year and Cole should have been used for backup. What has Luke Shaw learnet from his experience this year?

He went on to say if you look at previous winners of international tournaments their younger sides won the year's previous and the senior winning sides were made up of 7-8 players who won it in the younger levels. Germany have 6 players who lined up against Portuagal the other day who started the u21 championships. They've won together, alrwady beaten players at the younger level that they go onto play at senoir level and had the experience of the internation tournament. 

England have 2 players in the squad who have played in an international tournament at youth level.

[Wild Rover]

Back in 1984 I brought 2 lads over to DRFC for trials ( from Abroad ). Dave McKay was manager and Steve Beaglehole in charge of Youth. Anyway, to cut a long story short, at the end of trial period Steve explained that although the lads were technically very good they didn't have the "strength" to play "English" football.
So, it didn't matter then how "Technically" good someone was, you needed to be "Strong". Not a lot has changed.

Oh and Boomstick, the opportunities to "Play" football as far as English players are concerned is there, its called "The Football League", where if you are good enough, a "Big" club will pick you up, and with progression join the England ranks at U17, Under 20, Under 21 or whatever.

[not on facebook]

The reason why England Cant cope on the international stage at a higher level
Is for the fact that for last 40 Odd years on the football front are national team as stayed at the same level.

The likes Of Brazil,Argentina ,germany,spain,france italy have all moved on
In various forms but all making the distant between England and them sens bigger/better.

At the same time 40 Odd years ago england were Beating teams like turkey 0-8 and other teams Such as norway,rep Ireland,poland,all african teams,USA,Australia,rest Of not mentioned european teams were Well
Behind England .

But today if england drew 0-0 in turkey that be classed as a result for us since likes Of turkey and all above nations have closed the gap on us and in most cases are level pegging if not are beyond us.

Take Australia they have gone out Of would cup after two defeats ,but after watching both Their games they looked more usefull Than what England
Served up.

The FA had got to shoulder  a big part Of the blame for This as they are all about making money and not what is best for our national game .

In my life span i Cant see england winning fcuk all,but if FA gets to gripe with things today then maybe my kids might have som'ert to watch and shout about after 2050ish

[River Don]

Back in 1984 I brought 2 lads over to DRFC for trials ( from Abroad ). Dave McKay was manager and Steve Beaglehole in charge of Youth. Anyway, to cut a long story short, at the end of trial period Steve explained that although the lads were technically very good they didn't have the "strength" to play "English" football.
So, it didn't matter then how "Technically" good someone was, you needed to be "Strong". Not a lot has changed.

Oh and Boomstick, the opportunities to "Play" football as far as English players are concerned is there, its called "The Football League", where if you are good enough, a "Big" club will pick you up, and with progression join the England ranks at U17, Under 20, Under 21 or whatever.

Yep, the likes of Messi and Iniesta would be seen as too small.

[Boomstick]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

Your missing the point, in say 10 years time the team would be vastly better.
It's time to give the english lads REAL chance. aswell as promoting skill and technical ability over speed and strength.

No.....I am not missing the point. If ten years ago people were able to play more "English" in their teams, todays England would still be the same squad, as they are the best of that age .

Your mistaken, the abundance of english talent would be ALOT bigger.

[Wild Rover]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

Your missing the point, in say 10 years time the team would be vastly better.
It's time to give the english lads REAL chance. aswell as promoting skill and technical ability over speed and strength.

No.....I am not missing the point. If ten years ago people were able to play more "English" in their teams, todays England would still be the same squad, as they are the best of that age .

Your mistaken, the abundance of english talent would be ALOT bigger.

No, the pond would be bigger, the fish the same.

[Boomstick]

Boomstick

Liverpool are awash with England "stars". The England team last night included Gerrard, Johnson, Henderson, Sterling, Sturridge plus Lambert and Lallana. They are the very model of what you'd like to see.

Did any of those players look like anything better than first round group fodder last night?

And in the meantime, if you "weaken the Premier League initially", where do you think the money is going to come from?

Liverpool are a shining example, if every club did the same. Then England WOULD do better at the World Cup.

[Boomstick]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

Your missing the point, in say 10 years time the team would be vastly better.
It's time to give the english lads REAL chance. aswell as promoting skill and technical ability over speed and strength.

No.....I am not missing the point. If ten years ago people were able to play more "English" in their teams, todays England would still be the same squad, as they are the best of that age .

Your mistaken, the abundance of english talent would be ALOT bigger.

No, the pond would be bigger, the fish the same.

Your wrong, the players would be a lot better. Because the emphasis on technicial ability would be greater.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Your wrong, the players would be a lot better. Because the emphasis on technicial ability would be greater.

Why would it? It wasn't before we had the foreign influx.

[Wild Rover]

Wouldn't matter if they said all 11 starters had to be English, the same squad as are out in Brazil would remain, as they are the best English 11. ( or 23 ).

Your missing the point, in say 10 years time the team would be vastly better.
It's time to give the english lads REAL chance. aswell as promoting skill and technical ability over speed and strength.

No.....I am not missing the point. If ten years ago people were able to play more "English" in their teams, todays England would still be the same squad, as they are the best of that age .

Your mistaken, the abundance of english talent would be ALOT bigger.

No, the pond would be bigger, the fish the same.

Your wrong, the players would be a lot better. Because the emphasis on technicial ability would be greater.

Not a bit of it. Do you honestly think making a big pond creates better fish.