With the Spanish national team i don't think it's anything to do with a lack of quality. They have the quality, but they don't have the winning mentality. They bottle it when the pressure is on.

With England I think the problem is your own media that creates many expectations on their team, when the truth is they arent that good. Then when the natural elimination comes they cry and say "we were supposed to win!" when actually NO!, only themselves really expected them to win. And the many foreigners in the league argument is valid too.

For Spain, well they just seem to choke in important games, cant think of another excuse. They dont have the cold nerves of the germans, nor the tactical sense of the italians, nor the natural talent of the brazilians, nor the warrior soul of the argentinians, nor the absurd national pride of the french.

Good points made! Thanks Gonzaga. Obrigado!

as an england team supporter.. i've got nothing against croatia.. they're a good team..

but russia.. ha!.. they robbed our ticket to euro this year.. T.T

we've got top players who're hard to play together.. and.. and.. everyone seems to hate england team..

What a load of tosh!

England do have top quality players and you would need to be blind not to see that. The problem England have at this level is a lack of strong leadership.
It is significant that the last strong character we had in charge of the national team was Alf Ramsey. Successive managers since have all wanted to be "one of the lads" and that isn't what they need.
The possible exceptions to that were Graham Taylor and Glenn Hoddle. Taylor, however, proved he was clueless in his selections whereas Hoddle, I think, was kicked out too soon.
Fabio Capello looks to be just what England need and I am very happy he took the job. I predict he will win a major trophy for England.

i dno england have a lot of quality in there side but to be honest theres to many foriegn players in the EPL but on the brightside it does make the prem a lot more exciting but jus has a kick on affect on the national team

Sorry by I have to agree and disagree with you:

England do have top players problem is not enough of them. Euro2004 Darious Vassel? Do you really think that Italy would include someone of his quality in the squad? I have my doubts. I have a theory that small countries benefit tremendously of the fact that their leagues are free of their own best players which leaves room for good young prospects to florish. Just think of the case of C. Ronaldo and Sporting Lisbon. He started playing for that team at 17 regular on first team but do you think if the portuguese league was as strong as the english or the italian he would be as noticed and is development so quick? I really dont think so. What would happen is he would be on the bench for some superstar at is peak or worst would be lend to a smaller club where is development and confidence would be irreperably undermined.
That's what's happening in england and its going to take more than just change your manager to win you a major trophy.

No mate, actually Englad have quite regular players and you need to be english to pretend they're top quality. You know, media here in Brazil never put England among the main favourites in World Cups nor Euros, and people accept it naturally. They always say Englands gonna quite in the quarter and they rarely miss it. We fear Germany, Argentina, Italy and France a lot more

The reason why england can't win the world cup is because of the amount of foreign players in the league, this does no favors for the young kids getting ready to come into football, Like Arsenal they buy foreign youngsters and as of the moment not one Englishman gets a starting place regularly. This is why we aren't going to win the world cup because the big teams are not letting enough youngsters develop.

Vassel is not what you would think of as world class, whatever that means, but he was a decent player to call as a sub. Even Italy don't have world class players, 1 to 22. Our starting pair in 2004 was Michael Owen and Emile Heskey and while I have never been a Heskey fan, I think he was the perfect partner for Owen. I would also add, an injury free Owen is one of the best finishers in the game.
That besides, who won Euro 2004? Do you think Greece had a squad full of world class players? Or were they were just well organised? How about Porto. Did they win the CL because of world class players or because of a world class manager?




I agree with that to a point but not about the likes of Ronaldo. I believe the very best will always come through and Ronaldo is one of the best. And, as you cite English football to emphasise your theory, I give you Rooney_79586.shtml'>Wayne Rooney, Joe Cole, Ashley Cole, John Terry, Steven Gerrard. More recently, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Aaron Lennon, Tom Huddlestone, Micah Richards, Theo Walcott and others. These players managed to get to the top or are in the process of doing so.
I think the young players that possibly have missed out, are the likes of Kieran Richardson, Jermaine Pennant etc but that could be down to their attitude.

Regular players? So what criteria do you use in judging that? All you are doing is nodding your head to some Brazillian hack's opinions and calling them your own. Over here we call them Sun readers. People who can't form an opinion so agree with any tripe that's fed to them. The favourite footballing media buzzwords used to be, England's hooligans, yobs, drunks but now our fans are better behaved, they have changed to, England's lack of world class players, no technical ability blah blah - what a load of b*****ks.
Ashley Cole, Rio Ferdinand, John Terry, Micah Richards, Owen Hargreaves, Frank Lampard, Steven Gerrard, Joe Cole, Rooney_79586.shtml'>Wayne Rooney, a fit Michael Owen. If all that lot were put on the transfer list today, do you honestly believe no European clubs would be interested?

England have definitely under-achieved and under-performed in recent years but they have not been under-strength. Germany haven't had a strong team in years, good players but no where near as good as they have been, yet they still manage to perform in major championships. Why is that? It is because they are properly organised and properly focused. That comes down to how they are managed and that is where we have been let down. Regular managers - not the players.

Note to the Mods:

Notice the Rooney_79586.shtml'>Wayne Rooney hyperlink?

It seems ok with just Rooney

For me world class players have to perform in their teams important games, what never happens with the english. Where were Gerrard, Rooney, Lampard, Cole and co when England most needed them? In that WC quarter-finals against us in 2002? In Euro 2004 against Portugal? In Germany against Portugal again? Last year against Croatia? They all hide themselves when its an important game, what rarely happens with brazilian, argentinian, german, italian and french players. Regular players attitude if you ask me.

Oh and I dont build my opinions on what media says, I was just giving you an example of how your own media create fake expectations on you guys. The media outside UK consider England a good team but not a champion team, but you guys rather believe your own papers and end up disappointed

I agree that against Brazil the players bottled, albeit they lost to a lucky goal. However, I can give you games where they have shown their class. Argentina 98 and 2002, 98 (I think) qualifier in Italy, Beckham's free kick in the qualifier against Greece.
You could use your argument against lots of players. What happened to the Germans in the 2002 qualifier, where was Kaka against Arsenal the other week.
I watched a Juventus team give up against Arsenal in the Champions League. It was the first time I have ever seen a player happy that he was sent off and that was Camoranesi. In fact, I question the Italian psyche when things go against them.
At the other end of the scale, I watched Steven Gerrard drag Liverpool back into a CL final, 3-0 down at half time. One of the biggest demonstrations of character I have ever seen on a football field.

I don't accept your argument because it can be used to suit. How often does Ronaldinho turn up for Barca these days? I watch them quite a bit and I can tell you it isn't very often.

As far as our press is concerned, in the main, they support the team. Sometimes they may go over the top but I don't think you'll find many English fans that expect to turn up and win.
There is nothing wrong in being optimistic and feeling we should be in with a chance, we have the players to do well. However, no one thinks it is likely, as we haven't had a management team in place that can make the players deliver. I believe we have now and I think Capello will bring success.

You raised good points there and defended them well, but you still didnt got mine. First of all, the elimination in 2002 was due a 'lucky goal', but thats just another example of the caracteristical english way of find excuses to their failures. England was totally dominated in that game, and their goal was the lucky one, it was due an individual mistake of Lúcio. Apart from that the english team only watched Brazil play and the goals were matter of time. If Ronaldinho didnt scored that one, we would score by another way, and instead of look at your own bad performance and accept your infiority you guys rather say that you were eliminated cause of a lucky goal.

The other examples still dont beat my point. You named some situations where England didnt failed and players 'showed their class', but show class in qualifiers games doesnt make you a world class. And following those isolated games there were other games, more important ones, more decisive ones, where they choked, what only sustains my point. You talked about germans in qualifiers, but forgot that they still managed to qualify and reached the finals of that World Cup, and almost won it, unlike the english in last euro qualifiers. Then you talked about Kaká, but forgot that one year ago he was leading his team to the most important club trophy in the world, almost alone and with 2 epical performances against Man Utd along the way. Then you talked about Juventus, but forgot that the key players of that team, the ones who were supposed to lead the team to victory, werent italians. Were a czech (Nedved) and a swedish (Ibrahimovic), nations that, like England, have the bad habit of choke in decisive matches. Camoranesi wasnt a main character in that Juve team nor in the Italy team that won the WC 06. He kinda choked in Germany too but the squad had players who do and did their job in decisions (Buffon, Cannavaro, Pirlo ando co, even Materazzi)

The unique valid example you gave was the Gerrard one in Istambul, but still, he was wearing a Liverpool shirt. Can you remember us one important game where Gerrard played a decisive role with an England shirt?

Some interesting points from all. In truth i believe that all the main reasons for Englands failure have been touched upon, however i will say that certain views are given with a bias 1 way or other which really somes football up in general that for the most part its really a matter of oppinion. I will attempt to address a few points as best i can.

Firstly the point made of too many foreigners in the premiership is actually wearing thin. The league in its current form has only been around for 16 years with an influx of foreign talent over the last 10 or so years. If that argument stands true then what are the reasons for englands lack of success prior to the inception of the premier league.

Secondly, im not trying to defend England here but their defeats in major tournaments have usually come at the hands of eventual finalists and winners of these tournaments. Furthermore defeats usually take place with the aid of penalties suggesting that england in most cases have usually matched their opponents during normal play.

Greece are the current European champions - this would suggest that having the best players or perceived best players is not a guarantee of success. Much rather that the performance of the collective is what defines rather than any individual display which may in itself be eye catching. A point that would suggest strong leadership qualities on and off the field have a very significant part to play in outcomes. Now consider that greece subsequently failed to qualify for the 2006 world cup yet managed to qualify for Euro 2008 with apparent ease.

Can i offer any remedies? A difficult task indeed. Here are some to discuss. The stupid friendlies that they play before the tournament starts. Oh lets play this team because their style is similar to 1 of the group opponents. Generally that means lets get in some whipping boys to give us a false confidence boost when we beat them without breaking sweat. Get in some tough opponents that will test the nerve and resolve of the players. If were that worried about injuries then dont play the games in the first place.

Change the mentality of wanting to avoid this team and that team till this stage and that stage. To be the best expect to beat the rest. Its plain and simple. Ive often felt the whole seeding system is unfair anyway. Names should be put in a draw and thats that. Progressing means you have earnt it rather than you have had a favourable passage. Apart from anything esle how many times have we seen the perceived strongest teams in the final stages serving up rubbish and passing it off as a tight contest of football where the stakes are high and nobody wants to lose?

Finally, It would seem to me that the ability to change things when the chips are down is how the most successful teams go about their business. This is something that previous england teams have struggled to do whilst preferring to run haed long into the waiting and willing brick walls. Possibly because previous managers have been loathed to drop or substitute their under performing superstars.

It would seem that Fabio Cappello is set fair to alter a thing or two so only time will tell my friends only time will tell. As end note it would be wise to remember that as England undergo changes and improvements we must assume that any serious contender will not be resting on their laurels so therefore expectations must be measured against realism. Firstly and foremost i want to see a more entertaining england. Can i live without them winning yes of course - just as long as they put up a damn good show trying to acheive.

I think you missed my point. If you read back, I said I agree in that game England bottled it. Far from looking for excuses, I believe Brazil deserved the win. However, I will never accept Ronaldinho actually went for goal. As far as I'm concerned, he meant to cross, got it wrong and it went in. Lucky goal.
If you really believe England's goal was lucky because of an error from Lucio, then surely by the same token, even if Ronaldinho had actually meant his cross to be a shot, Seaman's error makes that goal lucky also. The truth is, Lucio messed up and Owen, being a player of quality, finished superbly.




You see, this is why your argument is invalid. Apart from being incorrect - I also cited 2 championship games against Argentina - you are now moving the goal posts to suit.



I give you a few examples but now you change your criteria from important games, which I'm sure most would consider a qualifier away to Germany as important, to championship games. The truth is, England winning 5-1, in a qualifier, in Germany, to a team that you rightly point out nearly won the competition, wouldn't fit into your theory.
You elude to Germany being of quality for reaching the final, although not when England played them in a qualifier but let's be really childish for a moment and analyse their competition, in comparison to England's.

First off, both teams lost to the eventual winners, which is no embarrassment, England 2-1, Germany 2-0. England led their game so in simple logic, could mean England did better against Brazil than Germany. Pathetic but true.

Semi-finals:
England out, Germany beat USA 1-0. You can only beat what's in front of you but hardly a jaw dropping result.

Quarters:
England lose to eventual winners, Germany beat South Korea. Hmmm.

Second Round:
England beat Denmark 3-0, Germany beat Paraguay 1-0. Open to debate but I would suggest the England result was more impressive.

Group Stages:
England, Sweden, Argentina and Nigeria.
Germany, Republic of Ireland, Cameroon and Saudi Arabia

England beat and ultimately knock out the pre-tournament favourites Argentina to qualify. Germany didn't need to do too much.

France choke and go out at the group stage. Portugal choke and go out at the group stage. Italy choke in the second round and go out to South Korea. Spain choke in the quarters and also go out to South Korea.

So in this competiton, would I suggest France, Portugal, Spain and Italy didn't have enough quality players? Absolutely not!
Do I believe Germany are the 2nd best team in the world? Definately not!
What the Germans did have, other than a little piece of "luck of the draw" is their impeccable organisation, focus and discipline.




Again you miss my point. I think Kaka is one of the best players in the world and I wouldn't be so stupid as to call him regular. I am emphasising how you can pull out a performance here and there to make the same argument you are making.

That Juventus team that collectively choked, more than I've ever seen a team choke before:

Buffon (Italian)
Zebina (French - Sent Off)
Thuram (French World Cup Winner)
Cannavaro (Italian)
Zambrotta (Italian)
Camoranesi (Italian - Sent Off)
Vieira (French World Cup Winner)
Emerson (Brazillian World Cup Winner)
Mutu (Romanian)
Chiellini (Italian)
Ibrahimovic (Swedish)
Trezeguet (French World Cup Winner)
Zalayeta (Italian)

Nedved was sent off in the 2nd leg, the 2nd time Juventus choked. I am happy to read you think Nedved is regular also - it really strengthens your argument.





There you go changing the debate to suit your argument again. What difference does it make that he was wearing a Liverpool shirt? You argue England have no quality players, that they choke. This was one example of how an English player showed exceptional character. But yes, to give one example in an England shirt, that 5-1 win in Germany. The one you dismiss as unimportant.

A valid point strass but one that would cut no ice with Gonzaga.

Scottish like to be called scots? Correct?

This is getting more and more interesting. Good to meet someone that can argument strongly and without having to insult others. Congrats. Now let me try rip you to pieces

I never denied that Ronaldinho's goal was lucky. My point is that both goals were lucky, but Brazil played offensive the whole game and we looked for the win, while England was gifted a goal in the beginning and watched we playing the rest of the game, even when we got the lead. The goal was lucky, but our victory was well deserved


You cited 2 championship games. In 98 England choked and lost to Argentina. In 2002 you didnt choke and beat them (in group stage), but later did choke and lost to us. About Beckhams goals im sorry but I cant talk about that cause I didnt follow England in that time. I didnt watch England's qualifiers games to France 98, but it doesnt make any difference cause even if you guys played great you choked in the World Cup itself.



That 5-1 victory against Germany was impressive for sure, and the game had its importance due all the rivalry between the nations, but it wasnt an important game. At least wasnt as important as a World Cup game. Lets be honest, nobody expected that England or Germany would miss that World Cup, even though they were draw in the same group. That match wasnt that important, cause in the end England and Germany would qualify. And the path you quoted there matches my point. I've been trying to say that England doesnt win World Cups cause they do play well and 'show their class' in games with a second importance, games that you can lose and still comeback later in the competition. But when you cant lose the game, when its win or say goodbye, you guys choke and lose, what doesnt happen (in most cases) with the nations I said. Did France choke and lose in Japan/Korea 2002? Yes. But 4 years before they didnt and won the World Cup. Did Italy choke and lose in Japan/Korea 2002? Yes. But 4 years later they didnt and won the World Cup. Did we choke in Germany 2006? Yes. But 4 years before we didnt and won the World Cup. Everybody chokes sometimes, but the difference between England and these nations is that England always choke, while the other nations manage to stay firm and win trophies, not isolated games, here and there.



I wont talk about Portugal and Spain cause, exactly as England, they always choke in decisions. About Italy and France in 2002, they did had better teams than Germany and Brazil, but having the better team isnt enough and football proves it quite often. Brazil and Germany were inferior, but didnt choke and managed to reach the final, unlike all the other nations. If Germany won that final it wouldnt be undeserved, just like we deserved the trophy.



Some mistakes up there. Chiellini wasnt in Juventus in that time; Emerson never won a World Cup; Zalayeta isnt italian. And Trezeguet, even though he was in french squad in 98, didnt played much and wasnt a main piece in the team. And in 2006, he also didnt play much, only a few minutes. Oh and missed the penalty that gave Italy the title. That Juventus team did choke, but what it has to do with the discussion after all? I said that Italy is a team that doesnt choke often, not club teams from Italy. Club teams are another discussion cause of the foreign influence they have. Even though, the italian and french players of that Juventus team werent the responsables of that elimination. I am a Juventus fan and am telling you, I dont blame Buffon, nor Cannavaro, nor Zambrotta, nor Vieira for that defeat. The players who were supposed to decide the tie, the protagonists, were Ibrahimovic and Nedved.

And I dont think Nedved is regular. I am a huge fan of him and one of my favourite players, due his class and loyalty to our team. Although, I've already learned we can't rely on him in decisive games. He's a czech version of Gerrard (I know Gerrard has proved his worth in decisive games for Liverpool, but ill talk about this later). He never did what people expected from him in the czech national squad, and that class them as chokers just like England, Spain and Portugal. For Juve its quite the same. He has loads of great performances with Juve shirt, but none in decisive games.



Makes all the difference. What are we discussing here? That England chokes and cause of it they doesnt win World Cups or that Liverpool chokes and cause of it doesnt win Champions Leagues or whatever? As I said in the other paragraph, club teams and national teams arent the same, due the foreign influence in the club teams. Gerrard does his job for Liverpool, but not for England.