The English model

[Oliver Twist]

Well I don't think there can be any doubt that lower class people are on average less intellectual than middle class people.

By 'less intellectual', do you mean less intelligent or less educated? Because the former is patently not true, while the latter patently is.

The amount of Oxbridge educated people I know who think their brains - rather than their money - got them to where they are makes me seethe with rage. Seethe. With rage.

Sorry, Peter. I have now read the rest of your post! And, broadly, I agree. Kind of.

Though some things can't be learned, no matter how much money you throw at it.

 

[FreshRed]

Well I don't think there can be any doubt that lower class people are on average less intellectual than middle class people. Isn't that implicit? Aren't blue collar jobs *broadly* done by working class people? And white collar ones by middle class people? Isn't that a central feature of the delineation? And aren't white collar people generally better educated than blue collar people? And is there not a strong correlation between one's level of education and one's tendency towards intellectual thinking?

Isn't all this just achingly obvious to a person unconstrained by fear of politically correct censure?

This is impressively snobbish for Liverpool supporters website and complete rubbish at the same time.

Usually like your posts, Peter, and would love England to be more successful in the future, but I do not think the intellectual interest or capacity of our footballers in the problem.

 

[Athens]

By 'less intellectual', do you mean less intelligent or less educated? Because the former is patently not true, while the latter patently is.

The amount of Oxbridge educated people I know who think their brains - rather than their money - got them to where they are makes me seethe with rage. Seethe. With rage.

Sorry, Peter. I have now read the rest of your post! And, broadly, I agree.

I was about to post something like this but you beat me to it.

 

[peterhague]

This is impressively snobbish for Liverpool supporters website and complete rubbish at the same time.

Usually like your posts, Peter, and would love England to be more successful in the future, but I do not think the intellectual interest or capacity of our footballers in the problem.

What about it is snobbish and why is it rubbish?

 

[FreshRed]

What about it is snobbish and why is it rubbish?

Snobbish because you suggest that England's football difficulties are caused by a lack of intellectualism.

Ironically, and one of the reasons I think the argument is rubbish, I would argue that two of the clubs best known of the years for playing "proper football" - Liverpool and West Ham - are based in working class cities/neighborhoods. The supporters of these clubs have long been known to appreciate "proper football" and these supporters would rarely be deemed upper class.

Finally, the argument is also rubbish because it would suggest that more successful football countries derive their footballers from a different class of the population, but on the whole they do not.

 

[peterhague]

Snobbish because you suggest that England's football difficulties are caused by a lack of intellectualism.

Ironically, and one of the reasons I think the argument is rubbish, I would argue that two of the clubs best known of the years for playing "proper football" - Liverpool and West Ham - are based in working class cities/neighborhoods. The supporters of these clubs have long been known to appreciate "proper football" and these supporters would rarely be deemed upper class.

Finally, the argument is also rubbish because it would suggest that more successful football countries derive their footballers from a different class of the population, but on the whole they do not.

Er, none of that actually refers to the post you labelled as snobbish and rubbish.

 

[Windom Earle]

It's nice to have all these players coming through at the same time (nice for English football) but we're still largely stuck within the confines of a system which doesn't actually value intelligence and tactical acumen. You look at all the managers of the premier league or championship teams - the percentage of them getting their teams to play possession-based football with emphasis on technical ability is ridiculously low. The general football conversation in this country doesn't value it, which is why the poster boys for the England team tend to be players like Beckham, Rooney, Gerrard and now Wilshire. Players with undoubted ability but whose most valued talent is 'passion'.

There's no sense within the FA of building an identity, cementing a playing style; look at the order in which we do things - pick a captain, pick a formation, pick a squad. There's no actual sense of developing a team that can peak at a tournament - when was the last time England knew their first choice side before a tournament kicks off? We fanny about with friendlies, lurch from one formation to the next because we're trying to be in vogue without actually understanding the pros and cons of each setup and how this will affect the players.

And then when we come to pick a squad it's just a case of picking the best/in form 23 players. There's no sense of what positions/roles do we need to fill. Gerrard plays defensive midfield for Liverpool, so let's play him defensive midfield for England - this despite the fact for Liverpool he's supposed to be a deep lying playmaker and for England a destroyer. We can't work it either way - if we pick a squad then a setup, the setup should reflect the quality of the squad (ie if your defenders are all slow as fuck, don't play a high line); if we pick a setup then a squad the squad should reflect the setup.

But we're plagued with backward thinking, partly fuelled by the media and former players. There's very little intelligent thinking on or off the pitch. Until that happens it isn't going to make that much difference who the players are because we're generally fucked.

Spot on. The England squad don't spend enough time together to deal with all the chopping the changing in anything like an adequate fashion. The only way around that is for the FA to adopt a style and stick with it. Ideally that style should be born of the dominate styles used across the English leagues.

 

[Dirkus_Circus]

Hogdson has managed to trick the FA into a third tournament.

It's beyond parody honestly.

 

[Frogfish]

No, I was just taking a break to tell you you're thick and decide whether you're too thick to even bother persevering with. Some, like Frogfish for example, I've concluded aren't.

Ha ha ! Here's this arrogant prick getting on his high psuedo-intellectual horse again. Informing anyone who has the temerity to disagree with him for more than 3 posts that they are thick. Go fuck yourself, again, cunt. You are in serious need of psychological attention.

 

[peterhague]

Ha ha ! Here's this arrogant prick getting on his high psuedo-intellectual horse again. Informing anyone who has the temerity to disagree with him for more than 3 posts that they are thick. Go fuck yourself, again, cunt. You are in serious need of psychological attention.

It's a witty response, but your problem is that I'm clever enough to go fuck myself and call you thick at the same time! Ha!

 

[Fabio]

Less of the twattiness lads

 

[Best Believe It]

Spot on. The England squad don't spend enough time together to deal with all the chopping the changing in anything like an adequate fashion. The only way around that is for the FA to adopt a style and stick with it. Ideally that style should be born of the dominate styles used across the English leagues.

It goes deeper than that, sadly. With Germany they revamped academies as well to make sure that the sort of player profile was being produced, and that the correct coaching of these players didn't just have to happen at national level. A progressive manager such as Rodgers, in charge of the national team, would be limited in terms of what he can achieve because he'd have a fraction of the time to coach the players in the 'right' way that he does at club level. Even at Liverpool he's got the youth teams and youth coaching mirroring the way the first team squad play. You'd have to have a set up whereby the national youth sides and U21s play the same as the national team, and that investment is made in coaching to support this.

At present it is hugely financially restrictive for new coaches in England. The courses aren't run widely and where they are they cost a huge amount of money. It's off-putting. And there's very little emphasis on coaching technical attacking football. Basically there should be all this stuff underpinning the national side and there is two thirds of bugger all squared at the moment.

 

[Windom Earle]

It goes deeper than that, sadly. With Germany they revamped academies as well to make sure that the sort of player profile was being produced, and that the correct coaching of these players didn't just have to happen at national level. A progressive manager such as Rodgers, in charge of the national team, would be limited in terms of what he can achieve because he'd have a fraction of the time to coach the players in the 'right' way that he does at club level. Even at Liverpool he's got the youth teams and youth coaching mirroring the way the first team squad play. You'd have to have a set up whereby the national youth sides and U21s play the same as the national team, and that investment is made in coaching to support this.

At present it is hugely financially restrictive for new coaches in England. The courses aren't run widely and where they are they cost a huge amount of money. It's off-putting. And there's very little emphasis on coaching technical attacking football. Basically there should be all this stuff underpinning the national side and there is two thirds of bugger all squared at the moment.

I agree and that was my point, although as I failed to expand on it you weren't to know. Apologies.

The investment in infrastructure and the changes likely to bring about a Germany style intervention to the national game don't seem likely to occur at any point in the future.

The squad picked for England at the World Cup this year were made up of players from teams who, for the most part, looked to play attacking possession based football in the league with a high energy pressing appearing to be the predominant feature of the majority of those defences. The squad that was picked had talent, let's not kid ourselves it is not World Cup winning talent or really even Semi-final reaching talen, but it is knockout phase talent. England should have made a much better stab at getting out of that group. That brings me back to my initial (lazily made) point: in order to get better out of their pool of talent; England need to be mirroring the dominant styles that these groups of players have played for the last nine months - not trying to shoehorn them into antiquated systems. That is going to require a manager with an appetite for pride swallowing who is not intent on forcing all of his own ideas on the squad.

There has been some discussion in this thread about the classes in football - I'm not going to get into this discussion/argument except to say that world's most successful national team could also be considered it's most "working class" : Brasil.

If you want to know why the English game hasn't undergone wide reaching, grassroots reform and brought in proper homegrown quotas (a suggestion brought up time and again when ever this debate surfaces) then look no further than the Premier League brand.