|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 18, 2010 2:58:02 GMT
Bent never stood a chance of getting in that squad. The only player I'd have taken him over was Heskey but he was a Capello favourite. And I agree with You about the press hence my "I know it doesn't mean much" comment in the quoted post. And Your last paragraph makes my mind up for me and is as suspected, those rose tinters are on! I'd be defending Shawcross like this though so it's understandable.
|
|
|
Post by captainfishpaste on Nov 18, 2010 3:00:51 GMT
Agree with your overall point cap'n, but Carroll was as good as anyone on the pitch for England tonight, and stood out more than Henderson (like you say, probably because he's a forward). He was very good in the air and won the ball well. I thought they both did well in a totally meaningless, bog-standard pedestrian England display.I agree entirely. If we look at that and say Henderson, or Gibbs, or anyone else isn't good enough or "ready", then you have to say the same about all of them. Was just all in all a very lackluster display, but the senior players should take responsibility for that, not the kids.
|
|
|
Post by captainfishpaste on Nov 18, 2010 3:05:46 GMT
Bent never stood a chance of getting in that squad. The only player I'd have taken him over was Heskey but he was a Capello favourite. And I agree with You about the press hence my "I know it doesn't mean much" comment in the quoted post. And Your last paragraph makes my mind up for me and is as suspected, those rose tinters are on! I'd be defending Shawcross like this though so it's understandable. They definitely have an agenda. Why hasn't Barry EVER been criticized for his performances for England by the media? Quite the opposite happens, in fact. He is promoted as a key player. He is one of half a dozen players from last night you could criticize before Henderson. Lescott, Barry, Walcott, Jaglielka, Foster, and Milner pretty much all had shockers. Henderson is a nice and easy scapegoat for the press, though. Young kid, unasuming, playing for an unfashionable club... aye, pin it on him... But aye, I am defensive of Henderson, admittedly. But I am not trying to say he had a great game or owt. He was solid and unspectacular in a team where most of it were poor or worse.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 18, 2010 3:07:10 GMT
Agree with your overall point cap'n, but Carroll was as good as anyone on the pitch for England tonight, and stood out more than Henderson (like you say, probably because he's a forward). He was very good in the air and won the ball well. I thought they both did well in a totally meaningless, bog-standard pedestrian England display.I agree entirely. If we look at that and say Henderson, or Gibbs, or anyone else isn't good enough or "ready", then you have to say the same about all of them. Was just all in all a very lackluster display, but the senior players should take responsibility for that, not the kids. It doesn't work like that though does it? It will only be applied to the youngsters as they have the chance to go away get their head down and improve. Players like Barry should be just written off completely and be replaced by better players at this time that player should be Scott Parker. He is streets ahead of anyone we have for that position. And they aren't taking responsibility, You're just taking it to heart because he's a Sunderland player imo. He didn't look ready to me and more time in the U-21's would be the right call imo. No one is blaming Henderson or Gibbs, they're just offering sensible solutions as to what they think would help their international development. edit-Why aren't edits showing up? ie edited at xxo'clock?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 18, 2010 3:13:16 GMT
Bent never stood a chance of getting in that squad. The only player I'd have taken him over was Heskey but he was a Capello favourite. And I agree with You about the press hence my "I know it doesn't mean much" comment in the quoted post. And Your last paragraph makes my mind up for me and is as suspected, those rose tinters are on! I'd be defending Shawcross like this though so it's understandable. They definitely have an agenda. Why hasn't Barry EVER been criticized for his performances for England by the media? Quite the opposite happens, in fact. He is promoted as a key player. He is one of half a dozen players from last night you could criticize before Henderson. Lescott, Barry, Walcott, Jaglielka, Foster, and Milner pretty much all had shockers. Henderson is a nice and easy scapegoat for the press, though. Young kid, unasuming, playing for an unfashionable club... aye, pin it on him... But aye, I am defensive of Henderson, admittedly. But I am not trying to say he had a great game or owt. He was solid and unspectacular in a team where most of it were poor or worse. I agree about Barry but Henderson isn't being used as a scapegoat. People don't think he's ready and I think it's a genuine concern. Rushing him could hinder him as much as anything. And they aren't being malicious or blaming him that's just a bit of paranoia.
|
|
|
Post by captainfishpaste on Nov 18, 2010 3:24:16 GMT
They definitely have an agenda. Why hasn't Barry EVER been criticized for his performances for England by the media? Quite the opposite happens, in fact. He is promoted as a key player. He is one of half a dozen players from last night you could criticize before Henderson. Lescott, Barry, Walcott, Jaglielka, Foster, and Milner pretty much all had shockers. Henderson is a nice and easy scapegoat for the press, though. Young kid, unasuming, playing for an unfashionable club... aye, pin it on him... But aye, I am defensive of Henderson, admittedly. But I am not trying to say he had a great game or owt. He was solid and unspectacular in a team where most of it were poor or worse. I agree about Barry but Henderson isn't being used as a scapegoat. People don't think he's ready and I think it's a genuine concern. Rushing him could hinder him as much as anything. And they aren't being malicious or blaming him that's just a bit of paranoia. The point I am trying to make is that criticizing Henderson has to be fair and balanced. He is a 20 year old kid, so if you pick him against a very good side, you have to accept before hand that he will look a little raw and have to play himself into International football over a period of months, not minutes, before he can be judged either way. Either we are committed to bringing through the youth or we are not. We can't do it half-arsed like Capello is trying. We can't expect or demand they make an instant impact. There has to be a long term view. Otherwise we are just repeating the mistakes of the past.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 18, 2010 3:38:52 GMT
I agree about Barry but Henderson isn't being used as a scapegoat. People don't think he's ready and I think it's a genuine concern. Rushing him could hinder him as much as anything. And they aren't being malicious or blaming him that's just a bit of paranoia. The point I am trying to make is that criticizing Henderson has to be fair and balanced. He is a 20 year old kid, so if you pick him against a very good side, you have to accept before hand that he will look a little raw and have to play himself into International football over a period of months, not minutes, before he can be judged either way. Either we are committed to bringing through the youth or we are not. We can't do it half-arsed like Capello is trying. We can't expect or demand they make an instant impact. There has to be a long term view. Otherwise we are just repeating the mistakes of the past. I think saying it is too early is very fair. Nobody is slating him, it just looked like it was too early for that lad. Nobody was expecting a massive impact but I expected better and I don't think moving him back to the U-21's now would be that unfair and would help him in the long run. That to me is fair and balanced, he has obvious talent but it was too early. And we should integrate youngsters but for the middle I'd rather see Rodwell and Wilshire given priority ahead of Henderson. They all should play at the U-21's in the summer though. And I watched them yesterday, they looked poor against a second string German side.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 18, 2010 3:40:34 GMT
I agree about Barry but Henderson isn't being used as a scapegoat. People don't think he's ready and I think it's a genuine concern. Rushing him could hinder him as much as anything. And they aren't being malicious or blaming him that's just a bit of paranoia. The point I am trying to make is that criticizing Henderson has to be fair and balanced. He is a 20 year old kid, so if you pick him against a very good side, you have to accept before hand that he will look a little raw and have to play himself into International football over a period of months, not minutes, before he can be judged either way. Either we are committed to bringing through the youth or we are not. We can't do it half-arsed like Capello is trying. We can't expect or demand they make an instant impact. There has to be a long term view. Otherwise we are just repeating the mistakes of the past. Thing is, at international level "committing to the youth" is about a hell of a lot more than who the current manager is and what his selection policies are. That whole argument is about coaches and investment at schoolboy level, not just sticking the players we've got in earlier. Frankly, no English player will ever be good enough for what we expect as a nation - not Henderson, not Barry, not Gibbs, not no-one, barring the odd freak of nature like Rooney, and even he's petered out early. With no real change in policy on the horizon, We'll be making the same mistakes for years to come no matter who Capello picks now...
|
|
|
Post by captainfishpaste on Nov 18, 2010 3:43:33 GMT
The point I am trying to make is that criticizing Henderson has to be fair and balanced. He is a 20 year old kid, so if you pick him against a very good side, you have to accept before hand that he will look a little raw and have to play himself into International football over a period of months, not minutes, before he can be judged either way. Either we are committed to bringing through the youth or we are not. We can't do it half-arsed like Capello is trying. We can't expect or demand they make an instant impact. There has to be a long term view. Otherwise we are just repeating the mistakes of the past. I think saying it is too early is very fair. Nobody is slating him, it just looked like it was too early for that lad. Nobody was expecting a massive impact but I expected better and I don't think moving him back to the U-21's now would be that unfair and would help him in the long run. That to me is fair and balanced, he has obvious talent but it was too early. And we should integrate youngsters but for the middle I'd rather see Rodwell and Wilshire given priority ahead of Henderson. They all should play at the U-21's in the summer though. And I watched them yesterday, they looked poor against a second string German side. Rodwell and Wilshire between them haven't as many Premier Legaue appearances as Henderson has, so if Henderson "isn't ready", then no idea why anyone would think they are. Let me ask you this... if that was Shawcross making his debut, and there were a good 5 or 6 players who played worse than him on the night, would you accept someone telling you he "wasn't ready"? Regardless of what we want to believe about England's quality, the likes of Lescott, Jaglielka, Barry, et al is the current standard, and on the night Henderson showed he is just as good if not better than half the team. In how many of his 15 caps has Theo Walcott "looked ready"?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 18, 2010 3:52:17 GMT
I think saying it is too early is very fair. Nobody is slating him, it just looked like it was too early for that lad. Nobody was expecting a massive impact but I expected better and I don't think moving him back to the U-21's now would be that unfair and would help him in the long run. That to me is fair and balanced, he has obvious talent but it was too early. And we should integrate youngsters but for the middle I'd rather see Rodwell and Wilshire given priority ahead of Henderson. They all should play at the U-21's in the summer though. And I watched them yesterday, they looked poor against a second string German side. Rodwell and Wilshire between them haven't as many Premier Legaue appearances as Henderson has, so if Henderson "isn't ready", then no idea why anyone would think they are. Let me ask you this... if that was Shawcross making his debut, and there were a good 5 or 6 players who played worse than him on the night, would you accept someone telling you he "wasn't ready"? Regardless of what we want to believe about England's quality, the likes of Lescott, Jaglielka, Barry, et al is the current standard, and on the night Henderson showed he is just as good if not better than half the team. In how many of his 15 caps has Theo Walcott "looked ready"? Because they're better footballers? All 3 of them should be treated with caution and expectations kept to a minimum as all 3 look to have the potential to be very, very good players for a long time. I've already said I'd be defending Shawcross like You are Captain, it goes without saying! But would I be right? Again we can afford this stance with Henderson because he has time to get to that level. Jagielka when played at centre half has looked international standard, Lescott hasn't, Barry doesn't and Walcott does nothing for me on the wing but like Henderson he has time on his side. For me Walcott should be used as a sub down the middle, he can finish and he is quick but can't cross for love nor money. Too much pressure, too early, get Henderson back in the U-21's, let him do his thing for Sunderland and then try him again when the time is right. That's not being harsh, using him as a scapegoat or any of that bullshit. It's about protecting a great prospect from this too early.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Nov 18, 2010 3:56:12 GMT
Shawcross definitely isn't ready, and I don't think he ever will be.
But then I get the feeling nobody's really listening to me. ;D
|
|
|
Post by captainfishpaste on Nov 18, 2010 4:02:33 GMT
Rodwell and Wilshire between them haven't as many Premier Legaue appearances as Henderson has, so if Henderson "isn't ready", then no idea why anyone would think they are. Let me ask you this... if that was Shawcross making his debut, and there were a good 5 or 6 players who played worse than him on the night, would you accept someone telling you he "wasn't ready"? Regardless of what we want to believe about England's quality, the likes of Lescott, Jaglielka, Barry, et al is the current standard, and on the night Henderson showed he is just as good if not better than half the team. In how many of his 15 caps has Theo Walcott "looked ready"? Because they're better footballers? All 3 of them should be treated with caution and expectations kept to a minimum as all 3 look to have the potential to be very, very good players for a long time. I've already said I'd be defending Shawcross like You are Captain, it goes without saying! But would I be right? Again we can afford this stance with Henderson because he has time to get to that level. Jagielka when played at centre half has looked international standard, Lescott hasn't, Barry doesn't and Walcott does nothing for me on the wing but like Henderson he has time on his side. For me Walcott should be used as a sub down the middle, he can finish and he is quick but can't cross for love nor money. Too much pressure, too early, get Henderson back in the U-21's, let him do his thing for Sunderland and then try him again when the time is right. That's not being harsh, using him as a scapegoat or any of that bullshit. It's about protecting a great prospect from this too early. I simply can't agree. Henderson is the equal of any player of his age in the country. That is why he has just earned his first England call-up at just 20 years of age. He completely dominated the midfield of the champions last week, and has bettered Fabregas on more than one occasion when they have been in direct competition. Tonight for England he was just about the only player in white capable of keeping the ball. He did nothing flash with it, granted, but he kept it and fulfilled his role in the team. Rodwell and Wilshire have done nothing to eclipse Henderson and between them haven't mustered as many Premier League appearances as him. To suggest that of those 3, based on one game, it is Henderson who is "not ready" is utterly ludicrous and completely lacking in logic and reason. If we'd have been sat here after a brilliant England performance, with Henderson a stand-out poor player, then I could see where you are coming from, but he wasn't even in the 3 or 4 worst performers of the night. Aye, he didn't stand out and was a little "anonymous" in your own words, but on a night when at least half the team stood out for the wrong reasons, that makes him one of the better performers, surely? You just need to explain your logic to me here, because I can't get my head round it at all. ???
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 18, 2010 4:15:02 GMT
I think Wilshire is a cut above the pair of them at the moment, Rodwell is very subjective I admit and a different player to Wilshire and Henderson but I really do like him and think that as a defensive midfielder or centre half he will become something special. Henderson is a great young talent, personally, in my opinion, I believe that the other two are better.
I thought he was totally anonymous which is not want I want to see from anyone at this level. And due to his age it makes me believe he wasn't ready. And I'm not the only one. The other 2 at the moment to me at least just look like better players, that is my logic. And one day all 3 will be playing in an England midfield. At the moment imo it is too early for Henderson. I'd like to see how the other two will do. I actually think today would have been to early for Rodwell too.
And it's not just me either, jezza from the match thread;
"Henderson looked shell-shocked and Wilshere should start ahead of him when fit"
|
|
|
Post by captainfishpaste on Nov 18, 2010 4:28:32 GMT
I think Wilshire is a cut above the pair of them at the moment, Rodwell is very subjective I admit and a different player to Wilshire and Henderson but I really do like him and think that as a defensive midfielder or centre half he will become something special. Henderson is a great young talent, personally, in my opinion, I believe that the other two are better. I thought he was totally anonymous which is not want I want to see from anyone at this level. And due to his age it makes me believe he wasn't ready. And I'm not the only one. The other 2 at the moment to me at least just look like better players, that is my logic. And one day all 3 will be playing in an England midfield. At the moment imo it is too early for Henderson. I'd like to see how the other two will do. I actually think today would have been to early for Rodwell too. And it's not just me either, jezza from the match thread; " Henderson looked shell-shocked and Wilshere should start ahead of him when fit"So you are applying no logic at all, and are just applying a pre-concieved and entirely subjective judgement. I kind of suspected that. I am doing the same, of course. Henderson could have scored 6 own goals and I'd be defending him, but you haven't conviced me I was missing anything obvious due to my bias. I think we have arrived at the "agree to diasgree" stage of preceedings.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 18, 2010 4:36:52 GMT
I agreed at that hours ago but it was too early for bed! ;D Wilshire is a far better than the pair of them and deserves his chance even if he is an Arsenal scummer. And the overall consensus seems to agree with me which isn't often the case so I'm pretty happy with it. ;D Henderson didn't look ready tonight and Wilshire looks the better player out of the 3 of 'em. I have bloody high hopes for the 3 of them for England though. And I reckon two of them could be forging their careers at a certain north western club whose name rhymes with "can poo" which will be good for the nation.
And I don't expect to change Your opinion, that's what I was certain of hours ago despite most neutral opinions I've read so far saying the same as what I have done. In a fair manner obviously! ;D
|
|
sting
Youth Player
Posts: 354
|
Post by sting on Nov 18, 2010 9:39:58 GMT
I could bolt my thoughts on to a number of threads. This seems as good as any. The fact that Neville is being mentioned at all is that England just doesn't have many decent full-backs. The desire of most managers to play centre-backs at full-back (TP included) is one reason. The other is that our best youngsters don't get enough game time. At least Henderson and Carroll are playing regularly and were picked on merit not just "youth". Phil Jones and Albrighton should have joined them on this basis. As for Smalling and Gibbs, they need league games to prove they can play consistently at the highest level. Onuoha had to go out on loan to get game time and now he's starting to look a player. He should have been picked on merit too.
The other thing that irritates me is that England performs poorly in the WC and there's a clamour for youth. Well actually there's a clamour for Arsenal/Chelsea/Man Utd youth! That's why I was pleased to see Henderson. The problem is however in the clamour for youth we miss a generation of players who have been overlooked. Scott Parker is a good example. Additionally, we now have a group of players who have been good enough to get in recent squads, e.g. Shawcross, Cahill and Turner going back, who are now suddenly not good enough and indeed have fallen down the pecking order to Smalling! There is no logic to this. None of these players have become bad suddenly and they continue to learn week in week out.
On the Bothroyd issue, I have no problem him getting a call-up if the same rules are applied consistently. I have heard people saying he lost his way and has now found it again. Well this applies to several others, e.g. Pennant, Barton and Etherington. The latter's assist record this season is one of the best in the Premier League. Surely this counts as much as goals in the Championship?
There are too many players who keep getting recycled, e.g. SWP, Lennon, Barry who have 35 caps plus and have had their chance. I have no problem with "youngsters" being involved at all but not at the expense of players who are putting in good performances every week and deserve a chance too. Jarvis, Cahill, Shawcross, Turner, Johnson, Danns, Nolan, Parker and Kevin Davies are just some.
Finally, regarding Davies, I think his treatment has been disgraceful. I'm sure he would prefer to be remembered as one of the best forwards of his era not to get a cap than a forward who had one of the shortest international careers (8 minutes). Whether he should have been picked at 33 can be debated, but he was, still is 33 and performing just as well. He didn't deserve this, there was no logic to it and for this reason alone Capello has lost any respect I still had for him.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Nov 18, 2010 16:57:14 GMT
L'Equipe on Henderson: "He'll remember playing against France for his first cap. But that's all.
L'Equipe on Barry: "Slow, awkward and subsequently often late in the tackle. What does he actually do?"
;D
L'Equipe more impressed by Carroll: "Deservedly applauded off. Didn't stop hassling defence. Only 21, but we'll definitely see him again."
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Nov 18, 2010 20:41:02 GMT
Phil Neville isn't even the best person named Phil Neville to be considered as full back. ;D
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Nov 18, 2010 21:15:30 GMT
The "Phil Neville for right back" argument reminds me, with The Ashes approaching, of Jimmy Ormond's retort to Mark Waugh's sledging about his shocking batting that at least he is the best batsman in his family. Phil may not be international class, but at least right now he is the best right back in his family!! ;D
For me it is Richards and Onuoha to fight for right back.
As for Henderson, I am with Bayern - yes, he started off being played in an unfamiliar role alongside a man who should not be picked for England ever again and whose fall from grace has been truly alarming and rapid (Barry) and then with captain Stevie G, who once again showed his total lack of tactical discipline in the middle of the park by trying to be all things to all men and instead being none, careering around trying to resurrect a horrific team performance all on his own. Admirable sentiment, but misguided in the extreme.
Henderson's time will come again (he should be retained in the squad, if not team), and hopefully in a more settled and better team setting, playing more to his strengths, but Parker's time is right now in the middle of England's midfield to replace Barry and Wilshere has shown enough in his regular games for the Arse this season to logically be considered next in line behind Gerrard and Lampard for a more attacking midfield role.
Carroll did show promise and should be kept in the squad, but will surely not be a regular starter once Defoe, Rooney and Bent are fit and firing on all cylinders again.
|
|
|
Post by scfclifer on Nov 18, 2010 21:18:23 GMT
Shawcross definitely isn't ready, and I don't think he ever will be. But then I get the feeling nobody's really listening to me. ;D not surprised chatting shite like that ;D
|
|
|
Post by Pretty Little Boother on Nov 18, 2010 21:24:15 GMT
edit-Why aren't edits showing up? ie edited at xxo'clock? I'm fairly sure that it's been like that for about a week now, or at the very least a good few days.
|
|