Home Travel & Free Time
We've started our first discussion for our Christmas campaign which is focusing on religion or cultural beliefs that help you when you're feeling down. Some of the responses will be used anonymously on social media as a video. If you'd like to take part, head over to this thread.

Steven McLaren...

2

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    As for over-reaction, is tonight's pathetic scoreline enough?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i'm no fan of sven but i just heard on the radio that he only lost 1 qualifying game in 5 years, looks like its only taken mcclaren 5 games lol.........enough said, time to bring back beckham.
  • Flake_MustaineFlake_Mustaine Fanatical Poster Posts: 1,261
    oh jeez, the less said about tonight's game the better :rolleyes:
    Least most the other home nations did well :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    As for over-reaction, is tonight's pathetic scoreline enough?
    Not to call for his head no.
    Don't think the formation worked too badly after the first quarter of the game but its the front partnership thats cost us these last 2 games.
    I've said many times Rooney n Crouch can't play together, I said it after the last game and I'm saying it again now. We need an Owen/Defoe type player to get behind n stretch the defence. Carrick had no where to ping balls to cos both Rooney and Crouch looking for it at their feet. Defoe med an impact straight away n it stretched the Croats and made them think about it, was too easy for them knowing England were never going to get in behind them cos Crouch jst doesn't have the pace.
    We were shite but the 2-goals were both comedy, that short arse should have never got a header away n the less said about the 2nd goal the better i think. But that 2nd goal really did kill the game.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Defoe worried the Croats? :lol: He's another Andy Cole- he couldn't hit a cow's arse with a banjo at international level.

    Carrick was shit (again), Lampard was shit (again), the only midfielder who wasn't awful was Parker.

    And the reason why we didn't stretch the Croats was because knucklehead played five at the back- it's no wonder we didn't have any width or pace.

    I always thought Sven did a lot better than he got credit for, and the performance of this moron proves it quite clearly already.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Go on then Kermit, give us your ideal team line up that we should have played last night. Now i aint saying last night was any good cos frankly we werent, however i would love to hear who you would have had last night...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You either didn't watch the game or no very little about football mate.
    Lampard and Carrick were shite, why?? Because there was no-one for them to fucking pass to. Lamps n Carrick got the ball looked up for a Defoe/owen type player running in behind the defence, which is where you can cause teams problems and there was no-one cos both Crouch n Roon were both coming towards the player looking for balls into feet.

    You laugh at me saying Defoe worried them but just prooves how little you know really. When Defoe came on didn't you notice the game open up?? Maybe worried was the wrong word but the Croats had a lot more to think about. Before Defoe came on they didn't have the slightest bit of worry about an attacking player getting in behind their defence because there was no-one there to do it. Carrick gets ball, looks up, Defoe making the run in behind, Carrick picks him out, excellent control by Defoe and the Croat defence were stretched for the VERY FIRST time in the game, 1 defender just got back and nudged it for a corner just before Defoe could unleash a shot. I know Defoe isn't Micheal Owen but fuck me he's better than a Crouch/Rooney combination. Either Crouch or Roon needs to play with a Defoe type player NOT together.

    Another reason why we needed Defoe on from the start, when you play 3-5-2, its esssential you stretch them, allowing the wing backs to make their runs forward. We were nover gonna stretch them playing Roon n Crouch.

    I thought it was going to end up as five at the back but it didn't at all, what game was you watching?? Whenever we had possession at the back it was a very spread out back 3 with Rio and Carragher going wide, Carragher actually advanced up the pitch quite regular and Cole was always up the pitch playing as a proper wing back. Neville was a bit less so, he was too deep most of the time. But it was only a back 5 when we were defending which is the how the system is meant to work, and even then it wasn't always a back 5 cos I remember numerous occasions when Rio/Terry/Carragher were fighting for balls at the full back positions.
    Seriously were you watching the same game as me??
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I never rated him as a manager, mid-table is where he belongs.

    btw iv'e been saying rooney is crap for 2 years.

    Come back Beckham plz.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I watched the "highlights" as I don't have Sky, and listened to the radio.

    Carrick is crap and Lampard is crap. Lampard in an England shirt does nothing except prove just how good Claude Makelele is. Fact.

    I would have dropped Lampard and played 4-4-2. I'd have played the same defence (minus Carragher) but I'd have played Parker and Beckham in the centre of midfield, with SWP down the right and Downing or Etherington down the left (but only because Joe Cole and Lennon are injured). I wouldn't have Defoe anywhere near the England squad because he is rubbish- if he's so good why can't he get a game at mediocre Spurs? I would have probably played Bent instead of Rooney, but only because Andrew Johnson is injured.

    I appreciate England are depleted- at least a third of my ideal first team is injured or suspended- but that is no justification for what happened last night. I didn't expect us to beat Croatia because they are a very good team, but I did expect us to fight.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well even on the highlights, you would have seen 'crap' Defoe making an impact when he was on. The Croatians suddenly had to think about what they were doing defensively.... So you would have played Parker instead of Carrick... Laughable. sorry but i disagree with that completely. The only problem i can see Carrick had was that there was no one running forward behind the defense for him to pass to.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Parker has actually done something this season, unlike the overpriced and over-rated Carrick.

    A good passer would create space, and if there isn't any space would pass appropriately. Carrick just wangs it up to Crouch. I could do that.

    As for Defoe, why should he start for England if he cannot hold down a place up front in a mid-table team? If he isn't good enough for bloody Spurs then he definitely isn't good enough for England.

    I can't believe people want to defend the clown in charge now.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I aint defending Maclaren in fact all i saw last night in the first half was England playing like the Boro played last season... But i wouldnt take carrick off for Parker... And you say Lampard is shit. i just cant understand that at all..
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lampard has done nothing for England for well over two years, and he isn't a shadow of the player he is for Chelsea. The only difference is that for England he doesn't have Makelele doing his running for him.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    caenine06 wrote:
    So you would have played Parker instead of Carrick... Laughable. sorry but i disagree with that completely. The only problem i can see Carrick had was that there was no one running forward behind the defense for him to pass to.

    The 'only' problem Carrick has was that he did absolutely nothing all game, I can only remember him doing anything once in the whole 90 minutes, and that wasn't that good.

    if he isn't going to help then waht is the point of him being on the pitch? I would much rather have Beckham than Carrick (or at least replacing Jenas in the squad), at least he can deliver a decent ball and not just make 5 yard horizontal passes.

    Having said that people are over reacting enormously, especially concerning McLaren.

    Neither of the goals was a result of the different formation and we were just as inept going forward against macedonia on Saturday as we were last night. I would say that he should have waited for a friendly to try out the nes fornation though.

    The most notable thing McLaren did wrong is waiting until we were 2-0 down to make a change, and then he should have put Bent on rather than richardson (another player who should not be in the england squad)
  • Flake_MustaineFlake_Mustaine Fanatical Poster Posts: 1,261
    Kermit wrote:
    Lampard has done nothing for England for well over two years, and he isn't a shadow of the player he is for Chelsea. The only difference is that for England he doesn't have Makelele doing his running for him.

    Very true.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit wrote:
    Lampard has done nothing for England for well over two years, and he isn't a shadow of the player he is for Chelsea. The only difference is that for England he doesn't have Makelele doing his running for him.
    The only difference, obviously, is that he has a manager who doesn't know how to use him properly. The same applies to Gerrard. We've never seen a Gerrard performance in an England shirt that even comes close to his quality for Liverpool. The only England player that has peformed to a world class standard (which everyone claims a few of our players are) over the past year is Joe Cole in my opinion. Ashley Cole has shown glimpses too, but no-one else comes close. But they've all been playing brilliantly for their clubs.

    So it must come down to the manager (both) and the system. Carrick is the classiest midfielder we've got in my opinion (Gerrard is the best, but Carrick is the most polished). He can pick out excellent passes, play with both feet, and rarely gives the ball away, as he proved for Spurs last season (look how they're doing now he's gone). But he's a player that relies on the rest of the team playing well too. He can't force the wingers or forwards to make good runs for him. I think Carrick and Gerrard would be a good combination, because they're quite different. Similar to Gattuso and Pirlo in the centre for Italy, except that Gerrard would be more of an attacking threat than Gattuso.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote:
    Neither of the goals was a result of the different formation and we were just as inept going forward against macedonia on Saturday as we were last night. I would say that he should have waited for a friendly to try out the nes fornation though.
    The first goal was due to there being three centre backs, and none of them knowing who was supposed to be marking who. This confusion was demonstrated by the numerous free headers that Croatia got in the box, which they probably wouldn't have with a flat back four who all know what their responsibilities are.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Come back and all these posts, where to fucking start with some of the crap that gets written on here :chin: :p
    A good passer would create space, and if there isn't any space would pass appropriately. Carrick just wangs it up to Crouch. I could do that.
    Bullshit, thats the only option he had. He's a quality passer of the ball but like someone else has said he can't make the runs aswell as pick out the pass. He had space to make his pass but the only pass available was 5 yards horizontal either side of him.
    at least he can deliver a decent ball and not just make 5 yard horizontal passes.
    Thats the only option he had..fact. He can't deliver 30/40/50 yard balls when no-one is making a run in them areas, hence why we need a Owen/Defoe type player.
    The most notable thing McLaren did wrong is waiting until we were 2-0 down to make a change, and then he should have put Bent on rather than richardson (another player who should not be in the england squad)
    Agreed slightly, but there was on 6minutes or something between goals, I think he was planning on changing and whilst deciding which way to do it we conceeded a freak goal, can't blame manager really.
    The first goal was due to there being three centre backs, and none of them knowing who was supposed to be marking who. This confusion was demonstrated by the numerous free headers that Croatia got in the box, which they probably wouldn't have with a flat back four who all know what their responsibilities are.
    Dis-agree. Look at the previous england fixtures, numurous free headers in and around the penalty box and thats usually with a back 4. I blame Terry for the first goal, that midget didn't even have to jump and he shouldn't have won the header, it was Terrys ball and he failed to get rid of it. Maybe he had a little stumble but it was his to defend and he didn't do his job.
    As for Defoe, why should he start for England if he cannot hold down a place up front in a mid-table team? If he isn't good enough for bloody Spurs then he definitely isn't good enough for England.
    For me its more about the type of player than Defoe himself. But why shouldn't he start?? We've played a few games under Mclaren before these 2 nightmare performances and we've won them, we've looked reasonably comfortable and we've got confidence throughout the team and the whole nation. The only reason hes being dropped is not because of his performances but because Shrek has come back. He linked up well with crouch and we looked half decent going forward, we threatened teams. We hardly threatened Macedonia and I don't think we threatened Croatia at all. So fair enough hes not holding down a starting place at spurs but the few games before these 2 England actually looked decent and he was very much part of that so why not play him?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kermit, are you bumming Scot Parker?

    He was absolutely shite last night, I don't know how you can defend him ahead of the other midfielders who were admittedly just as poor in that shambles of a system.

    Carrick's not going to be able to do much when Crouch and Rooney are both running towards him. You need a striker running away from the midfield to get the best out of Carrick. You have no concept of a good midfielder if you think Carrick is 'crap'. Play Andy Johnson, Defoe or Bent alongside Rooney and you'll see a much more effective Carrick. Yet again Crouch shows he can only play against part-timers.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Addict wrote:
    Yet again Crouch shows he can only play against part-timers.
    Stop talking shite. Like me saying Rooney proved against Macedonia he's shit.

    Why Crouch AND Rooney are both looking shite because they can't play together. Rooney needs a guy on the last man making them runs behind, just like Crouch does. The space between the midfield and Front man is where BOTH them play their best football, Crouch is never going to look good playing on the last man, hes slow as fuck, he needs to be in the gap with the ball played into him with people running off him.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Stop talking shite. Like me saying Rooney proved against Macedonia he's shit.

    Why Crouch AND Rooney are both looking shite because they can't play together. Rooney needs a guy on the last man making them runs behind, just like Crouch does. The space between the midfield and Front man is where BOTH them play their best football, Crouch is never going to look good playing on the last man, hes slow as fuck, he needs to be in the gap with the ball played into him with people running off him.

    That was a rather tongue in cheek statement about Crouch. I just don't think Crouch merits a place based on goals against shite opposition. He's never played well, never mind score against better opposition for England. I suppose I'm just sick of hearing the scouser 'current best striker in the world' shite. If you read my post I agreed that Rooney and Crouch can't play together. I said you need another Owen-esque striker such as Johnson, and I'd partner whoever it was with Rooney over Crouch any day.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Addict wrote:
    That was a rather tongue in cheek statement about Crouch. I just don't think Crouch merits a place based on goals against shite opposition. He's never played well, never mind score against better opposition for England. I suppose I'm just sick of hearing the scouser 'current best striker in the world' shite. If you read my post I agreed that Rooney and Crouch can't play together. I said you need another Owen-esque striker such as Johnson, and I'd partner whoever it was with Rooney over Crouch any day.
    Obviously Rooney gets in the team before Crouch but you've got to give Crouch some credit, hes stepped up to the plate in the absence of Owen and Rooney and hes never let the team down in terms of goals and effort. He's probably done too well to tell you the truth because it would have being tough leaving him out of the team but that is what was needed once The Roon returned.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru

    Thats the only option he had..fact. He can't deliver 30/40/50 yard balls when no-one is making a run in them areas, hence why we need a Owen/Defoe type player.



    I meant as in shooting and crossing from free kicks and corners. I agree that players need to be able to make good runs.

    beckham at least poses that threat, which Carrik doesn't, hence why i would rather have Beckham than Carrick........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Do you reckon McClaren will play 3-5-2 again? What a joke. I haven't seen that system used seriously since the 90's.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Toadborg wrote:
    I meant as in shooting and crossing from free kicks and corners. I agree that players need to be able to make good runs.

    beckham at least poses that threat, which Carrik doesn't, hence why i would rather have Beckham than Carrick........
    You mean Beckham playing in the holding midfield role?? I don't think thats two bad an option, because like you say he'll be on the pitch to deliver from set-plays etc.
    We still need that guy making the runs behind otherwise Beckham being on the pitch wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference in open play because he too would have only 5 yard passes available.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    We still need that guy making the runs behind otherwise Beckham being on the pitch wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference in open play because he too would have only 5 yard passes available.

    Which is why Beckham and Owen were so productive together. A ball playing midfielder needs that kind of striker, not Peter Crouch.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Addict wrote:
    Do you reckon McClaren will play 3-5-2 again? What a joke. I haven't seen that system used seriously since the 90's.
    I'm not sure, thing is I reckon it could work with the right personnel.
    In patches we played some decent footie through the middle but it was only in patches.
    Imagine 3-5-2
    Rio....Terry.....Carragger
    Neville...Hargreaves...Lamps.....Gerrard.....Cole (either Ash or Joe)
    Rooney....Owen

    Decent team on paper and could cause massive problems to opposition if we worked it well. I'd have Neville on the right because if we had another midfielder (say Becks) I think that could be too attacking against a quality side, Neville will keep the balance between defence and attack and then Ash or Joe would have more license to attack.

    I do think we need another system to play yes, whether this is the right one i'm not too sure, but we did try it out with a lot of our regular starting 11 missing.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bollocks thought cos it was former yugoslavian republic that it was acually the country lol, now i feel dumb :D

    on that note paul robinson had a good game, 10/10 for effort
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Imagine 3-5-2
    Rio....Terry.....Carragger
    Neville...Hargreaves...Lamps.....Gerrard.....Cole (either Ash or Joe)
    Rooney....Owen

    Replace Carragher with King and it would be better.

    Carragher looked like he was going in Slow-mo last night....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Parker was the best of the three, admittedly not tough, but there you go.

    Carrick is mediocre at best, he's vastly overrated and vastly overhyped. He couldn't even cut it in the first division with West Ham. How novel to see Addict wowing over the Man Utd players (if anyone merits dropping on current form its Rooney, not Crouch...at least Crouch sticks the ball in the net against the crap teams, which is more than Rooney is doing) as if they're world beaters, and anyone who doesn't join in the daisychain is "clueless" about football. His passing ability is overhyped (he can't pass it half as well as Jenas, for instance) and his tackling ability is non-existant. Useful for a central midfielder. I honestly reckon Fergie paid £15m too much for him (he sure isn't one and a half times better than Ronaldo, and he isn't four times better than Parker).

    No top team has played with 3-5-2 for ten years, there's a reason for that.
Sign In or Register to comment.