England Squad

[NewCorkSeth]

GK| J. Hart (MANCT), J. Ruddy (NORWH), A. McCarthy (READN)

RB| G. Johnson (LIVPL), M. Richards (MANCT)
LB| A. Cole (CHELS), L. Baines (EVRTN)
CB| P. Jagielka (EVRTN), G. Cahill (CHELS), P. Jones (MANUT), S. Caulker (CRDFF)

MR| A. Oxlade-Chamberlain (ARSNL), A. Johnson (SNDLD)
ML| A. Lallana (SOTTN), J. Rodriguez (SOTTN)
MC| J. Wilshere (ARSNL), J. Milner (MANCT), R. Barkley (EVRTN), J. Henderson (LVRPL)

ST| W. Rooney (MANUT), R. Lambert (SOTTN), D. Sturridge (LVRPL), D. Welbeck (MANUT)

'cause your not gonna win, so why not build for the Euros?

at some of these.

McCarthy in ahead of the likes of Forster and Foster?

No Kyle Walker or Townsend?

The England captain isnt there?

Building for the future with Lambert in there?

[Sanguine]

Milner is underrated, he's the Owen Hargreaves of the squad. He's there to provide cover across the whole midfield and as an emergency fullback if required. Barkley, Lallana, Ox and Townsend are the ones competing with Sterling for a place. Don't think Sterling has done anything this season to suggest he should be ahead of those four.

I don't think you've been watching much of him then. He's done as much as Townsend, and more consistently over a few months, not just for a couple of weeks. And Ox has hardly played. Barkley was hit and miss at the start of the season.

Point re Sterling is he is a potential game-changer, a 'moment of brilliance' player. You know what you'll get with Milner, but you also know what you won't get.

[TBM]

tbf i would have Sterling ahead of Townsend in the squad, but not Milner

edit, thats i wouldn't have Sterling ahead of Milner btw

[stealthpapes]

Milner is underrated, he's the Owen Hargreaves of the squad. He's there to provide cover across the whole midfield and as an emergency fullback if required. Barkley, Lallana, Ox and Townsend are the ones competing with Sterling for a place. Don't think Sterling has done anything this season to suggest he should be ahead of those four.

Exactly.

Every two years, the same people get this utterly wrong.

[Hoop Blah]

Milner is underrated, he's the Owen Hargreaves of the squad. He's there to provide cover across the whole midfield and as an emergency fullback if required. Barkley, Lallana, Ox and Townsend are the ones competing with Sterling for a place. Don't think Sterling has done anything this season to suggest he should be ahead of those four.

Exactly.

Every two years, the same people get this utterly wrong.

I'm a Milner fan, but I think the people who get this wrong are, in some ways quite right because in tournaments he's been used a defensive/responsible winger instead of the likes of Ashley Young or Theo Walcott. When managers pick him to play out wide it's quite understandable that people become negative over his contribution and don't seem him as the utility player than he is/should be.

[stealthpapes]

... but I think the people who get this wrong are, in some ways quite right ...

OK.

As long as you're happy with that.

[Vision]

I have to say I know he's young and all that but I remain to be convinced by the the whole Raheem Sterling thing.

A bit of pace and the odd bit of skill doesn't trump the wasted final ball and appalling finishing for me. I'm surprised he's played as much for Liverpool to be honest.

if we're looking for a game changer out of nowhere I'd even have Zaha ahead of Sterling.

I think re Milner there's an argument that City's recent great run (until last night) was kick started by his terrific performance in Munich. I think he offers a lot more than people give him credit for going forward too. Of course playing with better players might help as well as the fact most part England have been a pretty cautious team in recent times.

[6ft Kerplunk]

Just because he looks like a dirty Leeds street kid doesn't mean he can't play. I think he's a decent player and one that's capable of playing in whatever role his manager asks him to play. Play him out wide and he'll maybe not beat 6 players every time he's got the ball but he'll be much more likely to put decent balls into the box than Sterling. When it comes down to a penalty shoot out I'd much rather he was stepping up to take a penalty than Sterling.

[Hoop Blah]

... but I think the people who get this wrong are, in some ways quite right ...

OK.

As long as you're happy with that.

So you don't think the commonly held frustrations with his selection as wide midfield player is warrented?

I think there's a time and a place for it personally, but that recent England managers have been too cautious and used him too frequently in that role. That's why people see him as an ineffective or dull square peg in a round hole and become critical of him.

I take it you don't agree?

[YateleyRoyal]

I cant think of many better English crossers of the ball than Milner currently.

[Hoop Blah]

I have to say I know he's young and all that but I remain to be convinced by the the whole Raheem Sterling thing.

A bit of pace and the odd bit of skill doesn't trump the wasted final ball and appalling finishing for me. I'm surprised he's played as much for Liverpool to be honest.

if we're looking for a game changer out of nowhere I'd even have Zaha ahead of Sterling.

I think re Milner there's an argument that City's recent great run (until last night) was kick started by his terrific performance in Munich. I think he offers a lot more than people give him credit for going forward too. Of course playing with better players might help as well as the fact most part England have been a pretty cautious team in recent times.

Sterling is similar to the likes of Lennon, Walcott and Townsend really isn't he? He can cause havoc on his day and I think he's done quite well when I've seen him for Liverpool this season (not a lot admittedly). Those wingers that just rely on pace don't do a lot for me. I've always hoped players like Bentley, Milner and Pennant would come to the fore over the pace merchants (even James Henry over Kebe) but it seems pace and inconsistency is the way of the modern game at the moment.

I think Sterling has done a lot more than Zaha to merit inclusion in an England squad though.

[NewCorkSeth]

NewCorkSeth, there's not a lot of building for the Euro's or youth in that squad. All you've really done is drop Gerrard and Lampard.

GK| J. Hart (26), J. Ruddy (27), A. McCarthy (24)__________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 25

RB| G. Johnson (29), M. Richards (25)____________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 27
LB| A. Cole (33), L. Baines (29)_________________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 31
CB| P. Jagielka (31), G. Cahill (28), P. Jones (21), S. Caulker (22)____________________AVERAGE AGE = 25.5

MR| A. Oxlade-Chamberlain (20), A. Johnson (26)__________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 23
ML| A. Lallana (25), J. Rodriguez (24)____________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 24.5
MC| J. Wilshere (22), J. Milner (28), R. Barkley (23), J. Henderson (20)________________AVERAGE AGE = 23

ST| W. Rooney (28), R. Lambert (31), D. Sturridge (24), D. Welbeck (23)_______________AVERAGE AGE = 26.5

That to me, with the exceptions of LB, is an EXCEPTIONALLY YOUNG team. I mean its a stupid squad for many other reasons. Like the inclusion of Richards and the lack of real midfield experience, but there's quality there. That midfield, with a few additions (Zaha and Sterling come to mind) is the likely future of Englands midfield (maybe Rodwell too) and I just meant they should be getting some actual competition experience! The WC is going to be a bust so why not gain something from it by giving these guys experience? most of them will be at the next WC and some of them at the one after that.

[Hoop Blah]

Thinking about it right now, if the World Cup was to kick off tomorrow, my side would probably be (4-2-3-1'ish).

Hart, Walker, Cahill, Lescott, Cole, Gerrard, Wilshire, Johnson (Adam), Rooney, Lallana, Sturridge

Wilshire looks like he's coming back into form. Cole keeps his place over Baines, just, with Lallana and Adam Johnson on the wings (Milner on the bench to cover everybody).

[Hoop Blah]

NewCorkSeth, there's not a lot of building for the Euro's or youth in that squad. All you've really done is drop Gerrard and Lampard.

GK| J. Hart (26), J. Ruddy (27), A. McCarthy (24)__________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 25

RB| G. Johnson (29), M. Richards (25)____________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 27
LB| A. Cole (33), L. Baines (29)_________________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 31
CB| P. Jagielka (31), G. Cahill (28), P. Jones (21), S. Caulker (22)____________________AVERAGE AGE = 25.5

MR| A. Oxlade-Chamberlain (20), A. Johnson (26)__________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 23
ML| A. Lallana (25), J. Rodriguez (24)____________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 24.5
MC| J. Wilshere (22), J. Milner (28), R. Barkley (23), J. Henderson (20)________________AVERAGE AGE = 23

ST| W. Rooney (28), R. Lambert (31), D. Sturridge (24), D. Welbeck (23)_______________AVERAGE AGE = 26.5

That to me, with the exceptions of LB, is an EXCEPTIONALLY YOUNG team. I mean its a stupid squad for many other reasons. Like the inclusion of Richards and the lack of real midfield experience, but there's quality there. That midfield, with a few additions (Zaha and Sterling come to mind) is the likely future of Englands midfield (maybe Rodwell too) and I just meant they should be getting some actual competition experience! The WC is going to be a bust so why not gain something from it by giving these guys experience? most of them will be at the next WC and some of them at the one after that.

My point, perhaps badly put, was that apart from Lampard and Gerrard, you've not really picked a squad that isn't in most peoples thoughts (apart from Richards and Johnson for the younger model Walker and/or Clyne/Kelly etc).

If you're adament on throwing out the old guard and bringing along the youngsters for the next Euro's then I'd expect to see Luke Shaw in there and someone like Berihino or Sterling. Players like Welbeck and Oxlade-Chamberlain have already gone to a tournament with the senior team so I don't see them as experimental and giving experience for the next Euro's, but they are obviously still young and part of the next generation.

[NewCorkSeth]

NewCorkSeth, there's not a lot of building for the Euro's or youth in that squad. All you've really done is drop Gerrard and Lampard.

GK| J. Hart (26), J. Ruddy (27), A. McCarthy (24)__________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 25

RB| G. Johnson (29), M. Richards (25)____________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 27
LB| A. Cole (33), L. Baines (29)_________________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 31
CB| P. Jagielka (31), G. Cahill (28), P. Jones (21), S. Caulker (22)____________________AVERAGE AGE = 25.5

MR| A. Oxlade-Chamberlain (20), A. Johnson (26)__________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 23
ML| A. Lallana (25), J. Rodriguez (24)____________________________________________AVERAGE AGE = 24.5
MC| J. Wilshere (22), J. Milner (28), R. Barkley (23), J. Henderson (20)________________AVERAGE AGE = 23

ST| W. Rooney (28), R. Lambert (31), D. Sturridge (24), D. Welbeck (23)_______________AVERAGE AGE = 26.5

That to me, with the exceptions of LB, is an EXCEPTIONALLY YOUNG team. I mean its a stupid squad for many other reasons. Like the inclusion of Richards and the lack of real midfield experience, but there's quality there. That midfield, with a few additions (Zaha and Sterling come to mind) is the likely future of Englands midfield (maybe Rodwell too) and I just meant they should be getting some actual competition experience! The WC is going to be a bust so why not gain something from it by giving these guys experience? most of them will be at the next WC and some of them at the one after that.

My point, perhaps badly put, was that apart from Lampard and Gerrard, you've not really picked a squad that isn't in most peoples thoughts (apart from Richards and Johnson for the younger model Walker and/or Clyne/Kelly etc).

If you're adament on throwing out the old guard and bringing along the youngsters for the next Euro's then I'd expect to see Luke Shaw in there and someone like Berihino or Sterling. Players like Welbeck and Oxlade-Chamberlain have already gone to a tournament with the senior team so I don't see them as experimental and giving experience for the next Euro's, but they are obviously still young and part of the next generation.

I actually just crunched the numbers and the average squad age is 25.6, wasn't England's last WC squads average age 31?

Ahh yes I see your point now. I fully expect Shaw to be challenging for the first team (as should Gibbs), but my squad (while somewhat tongue and cheek) is not about absolutely doing out with the old (in fact I only took Gerrard out because I quite like the name Henderson) I see the WC as a chance for England to reinvent themselves. Cole and Baines are simply undroppable whereas Lampard and Gerrard (imo) are not. Welbeck and Ox have gone to tournament but only have a combined 33 caps. To put that in context Ashley Young has 30.

I know my (half serious) squad has no chance of winning but neither does a squad including Gerrard, Lampard, Defoe, Carrick and so on, so why send them? there are above adequate replacements who should be setting their sights on the next Euros and Englands focus should be building a squad of 25ish year olds with, on average, 50 caps.

[Vision]

... but I think the people who get this wrong are, in some ways quite right ...

OK.

As long as you're happy with that.

So you don't think the commonly held frustrations with his selection as wide midfield player is warrented?

I think there's a time and a place for it personally, but that recent England managers have been too cautious and used him too frequently in that role. That's why people see him as an ineffective or dull square peg in a round hole and become critical of him.

I take it you don't agree?

I think thats a bit chicken/egg really. I'm not sure whether picking him signals a cautious approach or whether he follows the cautious apporoach he's instructed to. He's been excellent going forward for City in a more liberated side under Pellegrini than Mancini's more cautious tenure. I just think he's such a good "team man" who follows instructions that people tend to assume that's he's simply a defensive choice. I'm with Papes I think he's better than that.

[Vision]

I have to say I know he's young and all that but I remain to be convinced by the the whole Raheem Sterling thing.

A bit of pace and the odd bit of skill doesn't trump the wasted final ball and appalling finishing for me. I'm surprised he's played as much for Liverpool to be honest.

if we're looking for a game changer out of nowhere I'd even have Zaha ahead of Sterling.

I think re Milner there's an argument that City's recent great run (until last night) was kick started by his terrific performance in Munich. I think he offers a lot more than people give him credit for going forward too. Of course playing with better players might help as well as the fact most part England have been a pretty cautious team in recent times.

Sterling is similar to the likes of Lennon, Walcott and Townsend really isn't he? He can cause havoc on his day and I think he's done quite well when I've seen him for Liverpool this season (not a lot admittedly). Those wingers that just rely on pace don't do a lot for me. I've always hoped players like Bentley, Milner and Pennant would come to the fore over the pace merchants (even James Henry over Kebe) but it seems pace and inconsistency is the way of the modern game at the moment.

I think Sterling has done a lot more than Zaha to merit inclusion in an England squad though.

I just don't see the havoc he causes though. It's very occasional given he's had quite a bit of game time and he falls apart completely in the penalty area. If Zaha had played as many games I'd be willing to bet his contribution would be more significant.

Maybe its just me though as a lot of good judges seem to rate the lad and Rodgers clearly does too. I just don't see it myself.

[Sanguine]

I think part of that may be how much Sterling's game has matured already. He's not quite the raw pace and dribbling 17 year old of last season, he is already a bigger physical specimen, more positionally aware and contributing in defence too. He's almost been hidden by his consistency this season, albeit he can be wasteful up front.

But it's the age-old toss up between a flair player who might cock-up from time to time, vs Mr Consistency who probably won't, but also won't produce a moment of genius.

Players like Cristiano Ronaldo didn't always find their man with a cross.

[Hoop Blah]

I totally agree Vision (and Paps), Milner is better than that and has more to his game than a lot of fans give him credit for. You only have to look at how good he was for Villa before City bought him to see that, let alone his impact for City recently too.

People failing to see him as the utility cover an excellent player he is (like Hargreaves before him, which is a great comparison) does largely come from the way he's used though, IMO. I don't think you can blame Joe Public for being disappointed to see Milner start on either wing over someone like Walcott when he's always played there (by the manager's instructions as you say) in a negative manner.

[NewCorkSeth]

Oh by the way with all this talk of Clyne and Flanagan are people just not interested in Carl Jenkinson? I mean I rate him quite highly. His development has been remarkable since the 8-2 era. I think he is worth consideration.