ahlycotc wrote:ResurrectionRooney wrote:2007: Failed to qualify for Euro 2008
2010: Failed to win the best English group since the Beatles, humiliated in Last 16.
2012: Dominated in midfield in every single game, eliminated in Quarter Finals after abject performance
Not to mention his constant failures to achieve the League title with Liverpool. About time he retired from international football and made way for players who actually have some technical ability and can pass to their team mates on a regular basis.
There are two major errors I find in your reasoning.
First, is the expectation of a captain (or any individual for that matter) to lead an entire team like that. No matter how good a player is, he can't carry an average or slightly above average team to glory. Take a look at Messi with Argentina. Now, that Argentina is actually playing better as a team and Messi in his prime, he can somewhat make a difference. Gerrard is far from being Messi, so to expect him to win a major title with both England and Liverpool is absurd. In fact, when is the last time a captain of England or Liverpool lead the teams to major titles?
Second, I recall you stating in a previous thread that you personally didn't see the importance of naming a captain. So blaming the failures of England on the "captaincy" is hypocritical at least. Who would you have captain instead that could lead the team? Joe Hart you say? His greatest influence (if any) will be on the defense of England. He can't exactly lead the whole team. Rooney? The hot headed player who spent half the tournament suspended?
Besides all this, Gerrard is one of the few players who actually caught my attention in this tournament. He was vital in England's goals and he was the only decent midfielder out of a team that was severely lacking one. Gerrard actually has some technical ability. So who are these other "technical" English players that he should make way for? And that shouldn't be Gerrard's decision, it should be the manager's.
Gerrard is a player who can "win games on his own". This is why he is credited with Liverpool 2005 and 2006 trophy successes, and I assume it's the reason no-one ever minds the fact that he fuck off out of position in every single match to try and do it. If he's not able to do this, then he shouldn't have the captaincy, as it simply encourages him to try and be Roy of the Rovers rather than be a member of the team.
You're right, I don't see the importance of the captaincy, but I'm not arrogant enough to think that I'm always right - nothing and nobody is infallible. It's possible that the captaincy has a big influence on results and I'm blind to it, unlikely, but possible nevertheless. Given that there is a chance the captaincy has an influence, and England have constantly failed with Gerrard holding it, I see no reason to continue with him.
Rooney is not hot headed, he has received only two cards in the last 12 months, one of them after the media had been victimising his family again. At least if we give it to Hart he's not going to try and win the game by himself by moving out of position.
He was important for a couple of goals, granted, but in the fundamentals of midfield play he was atrocious. Ideally he would have been played out on the wing instead of Milner with a real central midfielder in central midfield. The technical England players he should have made way for are Carrick and Scholes, now he needs to retire from the national team to make way for Carrick and Wilshere.
ricky//habana wrote:ResurrectionRooney wrote:If the captaincy definitely makes a difference, then Gerrard is an abject failure. If the captaincy definitely doesn't make a difference, then it doesn't matter if Gerrard is captain. In either case, there is no point in retaining this bastard.
As long as Gerrard is picked, he should be captain. Most of the players came out and praised his ability to let his football do the talking, rather than being a loud influence like Terry apparently is, they wouldn't do that if he was a liability.
The crux of the matter is that not only were England a man light in midfield half the time, Gerrard spent the majority of the time looking for the driving forward pass/cross as few options were available due to limited movement of the players, unlike the large numbers of short passes other nations' midfield key-men played. Despite this, those passes were largely successful.
He was also the only midfield player selected in the 23 that could pick, and play, an effective pass. The only other goals that England scored in the tournament not down to Gerrard were pretty much flukes, though in the case of Welbeck I prefer to see it as wonderful improvisation.
But i'm getting away from the point here. Whether an indictment on his mental state or not, Gerrard plays better as captain.
Seeing as Hart is good enough anyway, Terry is divisive (and puts his body on the line regardless), Cole seems to be reliable (apart from Euro 2012), and Rooney both doesn't need the pressure and hasn't done much of note on the highest international stage since his breakout tournament, it makes sense to install Gerrard as captain as long as he is selected for the starting XI.
Gerrard does not play better as captain, I wholeheartedly disagree with that. He forces himself into the game more, but this is not a good thing when you have only two central midfielders, in that case you need discipline, not one player trying to win the game by himself. So long as England rely on players like Gerrard who think they can win tournaments by themselves they will only ever win anything by a fluke.
