Steven Gerrard is a failure as Captain

I dont really like Beckham, but he did perform well for England in his time as a player and captain when a lot of the others let England and themselves down. But to blame it all on Gerrard after trying to troll the other night about him maybe getting a move to a bigger club because he played ok in the group games, just shows a certain person is trolling once again.

ViVaRooney wrote:RR is such a nobhead, he always blames one guy for failures cause it makes him feel better, fergie is the only reason we lost to barca in the CL finals, Gerrard is the only reason england went out and are not successful

its sad

Never have I once claimed Gerrard is the only reason England went out and are not successful. My argument is that England have consistently failed under his captaincy, so it's time to let someone else have a go. I've never claimed Ferguson is the only reason we lost to Barcelona either, I don't know where you get this shit from.

Ferguson and Gerrard are hailed as great managers and captains respectively, for that reason I hold them to high standards, I expect them to do great things, I don't expect them to be average at best. Saying that even an average manager like Di Matteo was smart enough to give an inferior side a fighting chance against Barcelona.

Danny wrote:The squad was undoubtably better when Beckham was captain. The problem then was Sven didn't like dropping the big players for the good of the team. I.e, trying and failing for years to partner Gerrard and Lampard (so much that he played England's best centre mid wide left), when bringing in Hargreaves/Carrick on a regular basis for one of them would probably have worked better.

Sven was vilified for selecting Hargreaves until 2006, and only an idiot wouldn't have tried to fit Gerrard and Lampard into the side with the level they were playing at at the time. At Euro 2004 it worked pretty well, and in the World Cup in 2006 (which England qualified for fairly comfortably) Eriksson had switched to a 4-5-1 with Carrick or Hargreaves partnering Lampard and Gerrard. Eriksson did an excellent job as England manager, I'd take him back in a heartbeat.

ahlycotc wrote:Maybe because the squad under Beckham was better than the one under Gerrard. English football has been on the decline for years and it's not the fault of Gerrard.

Of course it was, he's still better than Gerrard

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:RR is such a nobhead, he always blames one guy for failures cause it makes him feel better, fergie is the only reason we lost to barca in the CL finals, Gerrard is the only reason england went out and are not successful

its sad

Never have I once claimed Gerrard is the only reason England went out and are not successful. My argument is that England have consistently failed under his captaincy, so it's time to let someone else have a go. I've never claimed Ferguson is the only reason we lost to Barcelona either, I don't know where you get this shit from.

Ferguson and Gerrard are hailed as great managers and captains respectively, for that reason I hold them to high standards, I expect them to do great things, I don't expect them to be average at best. Saying that even an average manager like Di Matteo was smart enough to give an inferior side a fighting chance against Barcelona.

You expect Ferguson to do great things because he has done great things.

menalawyerguy wrote:You expect Ferguson to do great things because he has done great things.

I expect a man who is widely regarded as a great manager to do a great job managing the team. Do you see this as unfair? It seems to me that the majority of the people on this forum believe that only mediocrity should be expected of him because of the things he has done in the past, this seems highly counter-intuitive to me.

no we are realistic

there is so many things in football you cant control, you cant always win. Manager can only do so much, your problem is every mistake is fergie's, but every right thing that happens with man utd he gets no credit

and please dont reply with a huge post, i have no interest in arguing with you on this i am just giving my view on how pathetic you are

Yes Fergie with just the 4 League titles in what 6 seasons and he has lost the other two by 1 point and on goal difference. Shocking record that is

Chelsea won the race to decline badly first.

ViVaRooney wrote:no we are realistic

there is so many things in football you cant control, you cant always win. Manager can only do so much, your problem is every mistake is fergie's, but every right thing that happens with man utd he gets no credit

and please dont reply with a huge post, i have no interest in arguing with you on this i am just giving my view on how pathetic you are

I feel I have outlined Ferguson's mistakes pretty clearly and fairly. I condemn him only for the things that he can control, not the things he cannot, and I don't expect him to always win. For example - spending £20m on a mediocre winger with 1 year left on his contract, while Scott Parker - a moderately wealthy man's Darren Fletcher - goes for £5m when our problems are so blatantly in central midfield, is something I hold him responsible for.

Young was needed as much as Parker... and he was £16m

without young we would only have Park and Giggs as back up to nani and valencia. one of whom always seem to be injured. Park and Giggs cant do the job outwide anymore.

Parker is not a solution either, if he wanted to buy a "destroyer" in midfield i would like to think he would go for someone better and more dominant

England are just shit, can't really blame one player.

ViVaRooney wrote:Young was needed as much as Parker... and he was £16m

without young we would only have Park and Giggs as back up to nani and valencia. one of whom always seem to be injured. Park and Giggs cant do the job outwide anymore.

Parker is not a solution either, if he wanted to buy a "destroyer" in midfield i would like to think he would go for someone better and more dominant

One who could pass the ball would be nice.

I know we obviously need a midfielder, but I don't get why RR likes to mention the likes of Parker and, of all people, Joey Barton were avaliable.

Because despite how average they are they would have actually done a decent job for United?

decent job.. we already have people that do a decent job

we need someone that makes a difference in big matches and barton/parker are not it lmao

i dont know about captain but as a player, refer to what alan hansen said

"Pirlo has unbelievable quality and England cannot match him or Italy. Pirlo is fabulous, controls and dictates the game and is absolutely masterful. He will give you a masterclass in technical ability. A player like Steven Gerrard would just spend the night chasing Pirlo around."

http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2012/06/it-was-embarrassing-lfc-legend-slams.html

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

ViVaRooney wrote:RR is such a nobhead, he always blames one guy for failures cause it makes him feel better, fergie is the only reason we lost to barca in the CL finals, Gerrard is the only reason england went out and are not successful

its sad

Never have I once claimed Gerrard is the only reason England went out and are not successful. My argument is that England have consistently failed under his captaincy, so it's time to let someone else have a go. I've never claimed Ferguson is the only reason we lost to Barcelona either, I don't know where you get this shit from.

Ferguson and Gerrard are hailed as great managers and captains respectively, for that reason I hold them to high standards, I expect them to do great things, I don't expect them to be average at best. Saying that even an average manager like Di Matteo was smart enough to give an inferior side a fighting chance against Barcelona.

Danny wrote:The squad was undoubtably better when Beckham was captain. The problem then was Sven didn't like dropping the big players for the good of the team. I.e, trying and failing for years to partner Gerrard and Lampard (so much that he played England's best centre mid wide left), when bringing in Hargreaves/Carrick on a regular basis for one of them would probably have worked better.

Sven was vilified for selecting Hargreaves until 2006, and only an idiot wouldn't have tried to fit Gerrard and Lampard into the side with the level they were playing at at the time. At Euro 2004 it worked pretty well, and in the World Cup in 2006 (which England qualified for fairly comfortably) Eriksson had switched to a 4-5-1 with Carrick or Hargreaves partnering Lampard and Gerrard. Eriksson did an excellent job as England manager, I'd take him back in a heartbeat.

Just to be clear here, if your main argument is that England have consistently failed under Gerrard then this argument is unnecessary. When have England ever been consistently successful?

This thread is clearly a reaction to this year's tournament. England lost, on penalties, to a recognisably better side, in the quarter finals.

There's nothing new there from England. At all. If England hadn't won one WC and didn't host a league full of talented foreign individuals, so that the English are exposed to and subsequently expect a high standard of football, it probably wouldn't even be regarded as failure. I think failure is a pretty harsh assessment given we topped a tricky group and denied Italy a goal using a well-executed game plan in each game with pretty substandard players (Downing, anyone?).

A lot of people, previously not expecting England to get out of the group, are lamenting their exit as some golden opportunity spurned.

Whether you were one of these people, I don't know.
But what I do know is that, we couldn't bring our best squad, and like Hodgson's West Brom, an inferior team will only get so far by placing bodies in front of the goal.

But for the sake of debate, imagine Ashley and Ashley had scored. Would this have made this tournament a success?