The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Ever since the Swede first arrived in the hot-seat of the England manager's job, many-a England fan has been ranting and raving about how "great" former-Lazio gaffer Sven-Goran Eriksson is - especially after the superb 5-0 demolition of Germany.
And I have to agree - despite what I may think about foreigners; at the time, he looked like, possibly, the best descision the FA could ever make (well, by their standards, it can't be that tough!), and like he really could take our team all-the-way, into replication of the triumphant 1966 World Cup.
And then came the 2002 one in Japan and South Korea...
Sure, we did well to get as far as we did, and to come so-close to holding-off the eventual winners, Brazil. But our performances, overall, were not as "world-class" as those of the Brazilian and Dutch sides we are often being compared to (with Eriksson in-charge) - despite how great it was to finally get 'revenge' on the "old enemy", Argentina.
And even since then, things appear to have gone slightly further "downhill" for our team - no matter how many new and exciting players Eriksson calls-up - just look at the majority of the recent Croatia friendly, for example.
And if you ask me, Sven-Goran Eriksson is, really, no better at the job than the unsuccesful likes of Kevin Keegan and Glen Hoddle, before him!
Honestly - what has he really done for us that makes him any better than all the rest?!
He's just a big-name, with a big-face, on a big, bald head.
It all seemed to start-off very well. Yes. But I believe that was simply down to the fact that he is a very well-known and respected figure across the whole of world football, and that his arrival inspired the entire England team; giving them something ('someone') to really work-for.
And since then, they've all gotten to know each-other better, and get used to the idea of a big-name foreigner bossing them around in badly-spoken English.
And as for his own tactics and "ideas", I think the guy really is turning into a Swedish Meatball, and that he may well have been better-off accepting Roman Abramovich's offer to coach ``Chelski´´!
God knows how many youngsters he's bought into the numorous different squads he's selected! It's a very different list of players each time - how can we be expected to find 'consistency' with players moving in-and-out and all-over-the-place?!?
And it seems to me like earning your first England cap has become as well-earned and "meaningful" as that extra can of coke you get from hitting the machine on the side when it's playing-up!
Just look at players like SEVENTEEN-year-old Wayne Rooney and Paul Konchesky for examples of this.
If you're Under-21, and you play for a Premiership team, you're inline for inclusion in one of Sven-Goran Eriksson's England squads - that's the way I see it!
And then there's this 'diamond-midfield' formation...
I'm all for the idea of playing Paul Scholes just-behind the strikers - like he's been doing for Man United - but putting someone like Nicky Butt, Steven Gerrard or even Frank Lampard on the left-hand-side when you have players like Owen Hargreaves, Wayne Bridge and Kieron Dyer on the bench... It really doesn't make any sense at all!!
Yes, Beckham gets to play more centrally, but we need width coming from out midfield - with "proper" wide-players - so our full-backs don't keep having to push-forward and provide it, leaving us dangerously vulnerable to the counter-attack -- and that happened several times in the Croatia game, also!
He doesn't really appear to have much more of a clue that old Keegan, if you ask me. If he wants to be a 'hero' and send our team back on the track of winning-ways, he needs to solve the one main-problem that no manager appears to have properly "sorted" for years - and that is to find a 'proper' left-sided midfielder, with a left-foot, who can do the job down that left-hand-side better than any other Englishman in the country.
Until SOMEONE finally gets this whole thing sorted, I do not expect to see our England team anywhere near the final of any European competition; no matter how big or how small.
We just do not have a proper "team" without one.
Emile Heskey, Kieron Dyer, Owen Hargreaves, Nick Barmby, Darren Anderton, Joe Cole... (the list goes on...!) - All players who have played in that vacant position during the last couple of years, and impressed, at some point.
The trouble with Eriksson here is, again, down to the fact that he's too busy chopping-and-changing things around to actually stick with just ONE player for a couple of games, to give him the time he needs to adjust to the role and do his job well.
If given enough time and chances, I believe any-one of those names could make it as England's `No.11´. But Eriksson just isn't taking the right approach to solving this problem.
-----
So... Don't expect to see Football "coming home" again anytime soon!
And with the way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised to see us drop-out in the early-stages of Euro 2004 - if even we manage to qualify!
(Phew! I haven't 'ranted' like that in ages!)
And I have to agree - despite what I may think about foreigners; at the time, he looked like, possibly, the best descision the FA could ever make (well, by their standards, it can't be that tough!), and like he really could take our team all-the-way, into replication of the triumphant 1966 World Cup.
And then came the 2002 one in Japan and South Korea...
Sure, we did well to get as far as we did, and to come so-close to holding-off the eventual winners, Brazil. But our performances, overall, were not as "world-class" as those of the Brazilian and Dutch sides we are often being compared to (with Eriksson in-charge) - despite how great it was to finally get 'revenge' on the "old enemy", Argentina.
And even since then, things appear to have gone slightly further "downhill" for our team - no matter how many new and exciting players Eriksson calls-up - just look at the majority of the recent Croatia friendly, for example.
And if you ask me, Sven-Goran Eriksson is, really, no better at the job than the unsuccesful likes of Kevin Keegan and Glen Hoddle, before him!
Honestly - what has he really done for us that makes him any better than all the rest?!
He's just a big-name, with a big-face, on a big, bald head.
It all seemed to start-off very well. Yes. But I believe that was simply down to the fact that he is a very well-known and respected figure across the whole of world football, and that his arrival inspired the entire England team; giving them something ('someone') to really work-for.
And since then, they've all gotten to know each-other better, and get used to the idea of a big-name foreigner bossing them around in badly-spoken English.
And as for his own tactics and "ideas", I think the guy really is turning into a Swedish Meatball, and that he may well have been better-off accepting Roman Abramovich's offer to coach ``Chelski´´!
God knows how many youngsters he's bought into the numorous different squads he's selected! It's a very different list of players each time - how can we be expected to find 'consistency' with players moving in-and-out and all-over-the-place?!?
And it seems to me like earning your first England cap has become as well-earned and "meaningful" as that extra can of coke you get from hitting the machine on the side when it's playing-up!
Just look at players like SEVENTEEN-year-old Wayne Rooney and Paul Konchesky for examples of this.
If you're Under-21, and you play for a Premiership team, you're inline for inclusion in one of Sven-Goran Eriksson's England squads - that's the way I see it!
And then there's this 'diamond-midfield' formation...
I'm all for the idea of playing Paul Scholes just-behind the strikers - like he's been doing for Man United - but putting someone like Nicky Butt, Steven Gerrard or even Frank Lampard on the left-hand-side when you have players like Owen Hargreaves, Wayne Bridge and Kieron Dyer on the bench... It really doesn't make any sense at all!!
Yes, Beckham gets to play more centrally, but we need width coming from out midfield - with "proper" wide-players - so our full-backs don't keep having to push-forward and provide it, leaving us dangerously vulnerable to the counter-attack -- and that happened several times in the Croatia game, also!
He doesn't really appear to have much more of a clue that old Keegan, if you ask me. If he wants to be a 'hero' and send our team back on the track of winning-ways, he needs to solve the one main-problem that no manager appears to have properly "sorted" for years - and that is to find a 'proper' left-sided midfielder, with a left-foot, who can do the job down that left-hand-side better than any other Englishman in the country.
Until SOMEONE finally gets this whole thing sorted, I do not expect to see our England team anywhere near the final of any European competition; no matter how big or how small.
We just do not have a proper "team" without one.
Emile Heskey, Kieron Dyer, Owen Hargreaves, Nick Barmby, Darren Anderton, Joe Cole... (the list goes on...!) - All players who have played in that vacant position during the last couple of years, and impressed, at some point.
The trouble with Eriksson here is, again, down to the fact that he's too busy chopping-and-changing things around to actually stick with just ONE player for a couple of games, to give him the time he needs to adjust to the role and do his job well.
If given enough time and chances, I believe any-one of those names could make it as England's `No.11´. But Eriksson just isn't taking the right approach to solving this problem.
-----
So... Don't expect to see Football "coming home" again anytime soon!
And with the way things are going, I wouldn't be surprised to see us drop-out in the early-stages of Euro 2004 - if even we manage to qualify!
(Phew! I haven't 'ranted' like that in ages!)
Page:
Anyway i do find it quite amusing how there's a national outcry when a Swede gets picked to manage our football team, yet when a Scot runs our country hardly anything is said. Think if a Scottish person was picked as the manager of the english football team however, then suddenly there'd be a lynch mob outside the FA offices.
Funny country we live in really.
Funny country we live in really.
Firebrand wrote:
> lalakersrule wrote:
> Just a shame Giggs
> decided to be Welsh really otherwise who knows what we could have
> achieved.
>
>
> Decided he was Welsh? He was born that way!
>
> "Such a shame Ronaldo decided to be Brazilian"
He played for England Schooboys but decided to represent Wales at the highest level instead of choosing England, which is what i meant. So before trying to be sarcastic get your facts straight first. :|
> lalakersrule wrote:
> Just a shame Giggs
> decided to be Welsh really otherwise who knows what we could have
> achieved.
>
>
> Decided he was Welsh? He was born that way!
>
> "Such a shame Ronaldo decided to be Brazilian"
He played for England Schooboys but decided to represent Wales at the highest level instead of choosing England, which is what i meant. So before trying to be sarcastic get your facts straight first. :|
Giggs played for England schoolboys and he could've gone onto play for the national team, something to do with an english relative, I think.
lalakersrule wrote:
> Just a shame Giggs
> decided to be Welsh really otherwise who knows what we could have
> achieved.
Decided he was Welsh? He was born that way!
"Such a shame Ronaldo decided to be Brazilian"
> Just a shame Giggs
> decided to be Welsh really otherwise who knows what we could have
> achieved.
Decided he was Welsh? He was born that way!
"Such a shame Ronaldo decided to be Brazilian"
Foreman wrote:
"If we play Rooney and co now, it will bring them experience which will be more useful in years to come."
That is true. But with the more games they play at such an un-developed age, the greater the chances are that their development for the future will be effected - a perhaps even ruined - when they put in a "bad game", and get slaughtered by the fans and the media. Or if they're thrown into a vastly-important match with insufficient experience at the higher-levels, and find they cannot cope against a team like Brazil - who are, by no means, a Turkey or Croatia!
But, at the moment, it's the fact that so-many youngsters are getting so-few games at the moment. He'll build-up an 18-year-olds morale with a first England call-up, only to completely ignore him for the next squad to play against... Azerbaijan, or someone.
They're not toys, and they're certainly not Robbie Fowlers!
Yet Eriksson doesn't seem to treat them like the up-and-coming `stars-of-the-future´ they have the potential to be. They need more care - like a pet. They can't just be thrown-aside when he's bored of them.
And what's with all this "Sven" busniness, anyway?
Did he suddenly become every-England-fan's best-mate when he first took the job, or something??
No matter where I look, no-one ever seems to call him "Eriksson", besides me - yet it's never just "Alex" or "Arséne" (WITH the "ne" on the end)...!
"If we play Rooney and co now, it will bring them experience which will be more useful in years to come."
That is true. But with the more games they play at such an un-developed age, the greater the chances are that their development for the future will be effected - a perhaps even ruined - when they put in a "bad game", and get slaughtered by the fans and the media. Or if they're thrown into a vastly-important match with insufficient experience at the higher-levels, and find they cannot cope against a team like Brazil - who are, by no means, a Turkey or Croatia!
But, at the moment, it's the fact that so-many youngsters are getting so-few games at the moment. He'll build-up an 18-year-olds morale with a first England call-up, only to completely ignore him for the next squad to play against... Azerbaijan, or someone.
They're not toys, and they're certainly not Robbie Fowlers!
Yet Eriksson doesn't seem to treat them like the up-and-coming `stars-of-the-future´ they have the potential to be. They need more care - like a pet. They can't just be thrown-aside when he's bored of them.
And what's with all this "Sven" busniness, anyway?
Did he suddenly become every-England-fan's best-mate when he first took the job, or something??
No matter where I look, no-one ever seems to call him "Eriksson", besides me - yet it's never just "Alex" or "Arséne" (WITH the "ne" on the end)...!
The facts don't lie.
16 competitive games and one loss (which was a narrow loss agianst the team who went onto win the flaming thing)
Rewind to 2000
Decent team on paper, awful football, couldnt pass the ball.
Under Ericksson (sp), we've occasionly put in some shocking performances but still got the results (I.e Slovakia)
Forget about these friendlies, when it comes down to doing the real business we've done it under this old swedish bloke.
Just wait until October - i dont want to jinx anything - but that game *should* (2 coming results pending) be a game where the business is going to be done.
Feel free to quote me on this in October - and i normally discuss from a pessimistic perspective.
16 competitive games and one loss (which was a narrow loss agianst the team who went onto win the flaming thing)
Rewind to 2000
Decent team on paper, awful football, couldnt pass the ball.
Under Ericksson (sp), we've occasionly put in some shocking performances but still got the results (I.e Slovakia)
Forget about these friendlies, when it comes down to doing the real business we've done it under this old swedish bloke.
Just wait until October - i dont want to jinx anything - but that game *should* (2 coming results pending) be a game where the business is going to be done.
Feel free to quote me on this in October - and i normally discuss from a pessimistic perspective.
Foreman wrote:
Don't forget that Pele was
> ONLY 17 when he played for Brazil in the World Cup.
Yea but Pele had/has more talent in his little finger then Rooney has.
Anyway i wasn't too fussed when a Swede got named as England boss, if he can do the job then who cares where he comes from. Sure it would be nice to have an english manager but if there's no one around that's any good then you have to look elsewhere.
One problem all managers are going to have, other then the one where as soon as they become England manager an evil spell comes over them and they suddenly believe Heskey is International material, is the troublesome left side of midfield. Sinclair looked like he could fill that space but he isn't exactly going to frighten the opposition when they see his name on the team sheet. Until we actually have a natural left footed player on the left side of the park we'll never win a major trophy no matter how good the manager is. Just a shame Giggs decided to be Welsh really otherwise who knows what we could have achieved.
Don't forget that Pele was
> ONLY 17 when he played for Brazil in the World Cup.
Yea but Pele had/has more talent in his little finger then Rooney has.
Anyway i wasn't too fussed when a Swede got named as England boss, if he can do the job then who cares where he comes from. Sure it would be nice to have an english manager but if there's no one around that's any good then you have to look elsewhere.
One problem all managers are going to have, other then the one where as soon as they become England manager an evil spell comes over them and they suddenly believe Heskey is International material, is the troublesome left side of midfield. Sinclair looked like he could fill that space but he isn't exactly going to frighten the opposition when they see his name on the team sheet. Until we actually have a natural left footed player on the left side of the park we'll never win a major trophy no matter how good the manager is. Just a shame Giggs decided to be Welsh really otherwise who knows what we could have achieved.
Foreman wrote:
> Sir Bobby Robson would probably do a good job, aswell as McClaren.
Your right, Sir Bobby probably is the best actual English manager around.
I think he was mentioned at the time when Keegan resigned, but was intent to stay at St.James's.
I would love to see an English manager again as most people would, but I just cannot see who would make the best use of all the good young talent we have in this country.
> Sir Bobby Robson would probably do a good job, aswell as McClaren.
Your right, Sir Bobby probably is the best actual English manager around.
I think he was mentioned at the time when Keegan resigned, but was intent to stay at St.James's.
I would love to see an English manager again as most people would, but I just cannot see who would make the best use of all the good young talent we have in this country.
Colourless wrote:
> Graeme Le Saux should play on the Left of midfield.
Le saux would be a good choice, but Alan Thompson is a more accomplished winger, seeing that Le Saux's first position is as a full-back. Phil Neville plays both roles as well, but is more accomplished on the wing, having played ML for United recently.
> Graeme Le Saux should play on the Left of midfield.
Le saux would be a good choice, but Alan Thompson is a more accomplished winger, seeing that Le Saux's first position is as a full-back. Phil Neville plays both roles as well, but is more accomplished on the wing, having played ML for United recently.
Munson wrote:
> Which English manager could do a better job at the moment,England have
> only lost one competetive game since Eriksson took over.
Yes, Sven is a good England manager. But it wouldn't feel right if we won Euro 2004 with a foreign manager.
Sir Bobby Robson would probably do a good job, aswell as McClaren.
> Which English manager could do a better job at the moment,England have
> only lost one competetive game since Eriksson took over.
Yes, Sven is a good England manager. But it wouldn't feel right if we won Euro 2004 with a foreign manager.
Sir Bobby Robson would probably do a good job, aswell as McClaren.
Page: