BBC Home

Explore the BBC

25 comments

user rating: 3 star

why england can't win the world cup!!

World Cup England
by JSHIR5 (U14426483) 15 May 2010
comment on the article

recently i was thinking is winning the world cup a too much of a high expectation, considering these reasons.....

1) besides croatia- who have we actually beaten, that can be considered a good team? we lost to spain, lost to brazil. both times thoroughly outplayed and any argument that cappello has since improved the side is flawed beacuse the same thing can be said about brazil and spain.

2) england is a small country with high expectations. realistically reaching semi finals should be considered a succes in my opionion.

3) Not enough world class players. Every england player is hyped by the british media. we have a thing that the premier league is the best league in the world and so english players playing in it should all be world class and better than those playing in other leagues. players from other countries are much better than we think they are (thanks to the media). we have 1 or 2 world class players in our team, you cant win a world cup relying on two players.

4) we rely on too many individuals. take for example rooney. ''if rooney gets injured we cant win the world cup'' is exactly the kind of thinking that will never win us the world cup. if spain lose torres, xavi or even iniesta- they will still be favourites. if brazil lose robinho or kaka they will still have players who can come in and step up to the task. these teams win beacuse they play as a TEAM! not rely on individuals. although to an extent you have to have players who can change games but not as far as we do with england.

5) not enough hard work. the players DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT MENTALITY to win the wc. most of them are overpayed, over hyped players who have lost the understanding of hard work. you go to countries like brazil, argentian, spain and players work tremendously hard, have the right mentality, would die for the shirt they wear and are not driven by money but are driven success.

the combination of these reasons is why i belive england wont win the WC unless drastic changes take place.

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted May 17, 2010

What a ridiculous arguement. as everyone else has said, Friendlies dont mean sweet FA. In actual fact, the whole point of a friendly is to experiment with players who arnt your first team regulars.

I agree that the 2 teams nobody wants to face are Spain and Brazil, but if im right, the way the draw works out, those 2 could have to play each other before any of them can meet England. So all we would need is one virtuoso performance against one of them. But more than that, I reckon England are also a team nobody wants to face. Rooneys been unplayable at times this year, lampards been scoring for fun, Gerrard can produce moments of magic and Lennon and walcott can tear most players apart on their day.

Engalnd have more than enough world class players, but i do agree that most of them arnt always as focused as they cant be. Im just glad Capellos had the sense to ban the Wags. For all their millions and it being a world cup year they should defo go without seeing theie spoilt tangerine's for a month

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 17, 2010

have you actually ever been to brazil or argentina and taken in interest in the leagues?!

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by WH1991 (U14017538)

posted May 17, 2010

1) Croatia were ranked in the top 10 when we beat them. We also beat Germany 2-1 in a friendly missing a lot of first team regulars with Terry and Upson getting the goals. We also drew to Holland after two amateur mistakes in the first ten minutes put us down 2-0. We only lost 1-0 to Brazil once again with a reserve team we didn't have Lampard, Gerrard, Lennon, Joe Cole or Beckham, G.Johnson, A.Cole or R.Ferdinand.
So im my opinion that was a half decent result. France was also once of the first games Capello managed for England and therefore he didn't have a decent conclusion on the squad remember we only beat Andorra 2-0 roughly around the same time not to mention all of the problems that are now inherent in the French team. The only one I can't defend is Spain who outplayed us.

2) England is a small country, yes. But it is our core national sport places like America or Australia have a lot of kids picking other national sports instead this is particulary true of America whereas England the large majority of kids who want to play sport play football. Another thing we have some of the best footballing infrastructure in the world due to the fact that our league is one of the best and we started early having founded the first Football clubs.

3) Not enough world class players? Does this explain why Rooney and A.Cole are wanted by Real Madrid or why Jose Mourinho is constantly trying to get Frank Lampard? Not to mention all of the interest surrounding Steven Gerrard. England do have enough world class players but only in certain positions its our other positions that let us down - RB, GK, RM and Second Striker.

4) As shown by the result against Germany when we were WITHOUT Wayne Rooney and still won 2-1 just goes to show this statement is rubbish. Sure we have built a team around Rooney, Lampard, Heskey, Gerrard and Barry but we would still do alright without him we would just have to adapt our tactical set up and make a different player the focal point of our attack. We quite clearly play as a team here are some stats for you: England got the highest amount of goals in the WC2010 European qualifying, with only 9 out of 34 coming from Rooney.

5) The point you have made here is valid but for the whole of football not just the England squad. Moreover it has just emerged that the entire team are donating their world cup fees entirely to charity.

I don't think England will win the World Cup we don't have enough squad depth and i still feel the midfield is all over the place. I think we have a chance we have a top notch manager and i dont think it is helpful that people like you based on the medias conclusions think otherwise.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 17, 2010

Italy won the last world cup with no so-called 'world class' players - so what's all the fuss about? What you need is a 'team' and a whole lot of luck (like a dodgy penalty in the dying minutes against an Aussie team that's played you off the park or in the final your opposition's only 'world class' player head butting your centre back in the chest and getting sent off). Italy were rubbish and they won the world cup - we have the potential to be as equally rubbish so I predict a handsome world cup victory for the mighty Blighty (luck permitting)!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 17, 2010

Ludicrous post! I feel genuinely sorry for you if you feel this way about your home nation going into a world cup. How can England be considered a small country in footballing terms? We have far greater wealth than most and spend it lavishly on sporting facilities/development...not to mention the fact we have a greater population than countries like Spain. You do England a disservice here, we are a country who expect greater things than a semi final and rightly so.

Anyway, regardless of most of the points you make, anything can happen in a game of football, especially over a world cup tournament...history teaches us so!

Come on England!

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by S_Lfc (U14469838)

posted May 17, 2010

England are more than good enough to win the world cup they jus need to keep players motivated and pumped up, any one can win the cup for example serbia they jus need to be pumped up n motivated. So all this talk about we don't have world class players is rubbish. But Ashley Young and Agbonlahor should have been added into the squad. Walcott is not better than young, hes jus too unexpericned for a world cup but is good. And finally why hasenttt capello tried out the rooney and gerrard partnership up front, he knows thats gerrads strongest position aswell as CM. Worth a try with Milner and lennon on the wings with lampard and barry(if fit)in Centre Mid. Johnson, Carra, Terry, Cole in defence and James in goal. Not green i hate him hes rubbish compared to james and hart.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 17, 2010

In terms of talent, there are three teams clearly better, Spain, Brazil and Argentina, and another 5 or so about as good: the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, France and Portugal. But what wins games even more than talent is confidence, tactics and luck.

Otherwise, how did the US beat Spain in the Confed Cup? They thought for some reason they could win, they got the tactics right (give them as little space as possible) and they had the luck that Spain was flat and tired.

England's problem has been that it's lacked confidence and perhaps luck, which happens to national teams until, for some reason, they snap out of it. This could be the year, though it probably won't be.

Finally, I'm really no expert, but I don't believe off-hand that English players don't train as hard as others. There are always some exceptions, but very successful athletes usually train both hard and intelligently.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 18, 2010

Like Greece!?
What are you on about.......If Japan won the World Cup it would be like Greece wininng the Euro. If England won it it would be like Spain winning Euro 2008.
Sorry but you're crazy and demented, and so is the BBC guy who chose to put it up beside the article. Terrible Words Are Trouble!!!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 19, 2010

England have enough ammunition and finally the right manager to be in a position to win the WC. Whether they will or not remains of course to be seen because so many things can happen, so many variables come into play, including luck sometimes.
They are up there with the contenders. That's all we can ask.
The English team have big game experience running through it, many international caps, and especially year after year competing in the biggest Champions League fixtures, and these are players who have succeeded in the CL environment. Playing for country and club is not always the same but these are proven players.
I do agree with the opening poster on one point - that the term world class is bounded about too easily. England's only contenders are for me, Rio, A Cole, Lampard and Rooney. No way Gerrard! Hollywood moment player that he is.
Anyway it is not always about the world class players. You need some there for sure but they do not always have to dazzle. E.g 2006 when probably Cannavero, Totti and Buffon the only world class Italian players (Pirlo maybe?). These guys did well but were not stand out and did not need to be, it was a combined team effort with the non-world class players playing great too, e.g. Grosso, Perotta, Zambrotta, Camoranesi etc.
So for me players like Lennon, Johnson, Barry, James also have a huge role to play.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted May 23, 2010

As for point 2. What a load of self-deprecating drivel. It's quite a tiresome argument. First of all, England is not a small country. The population of England is approximately 50 million. Let's compare this with France: 65 million. Italy: 65 million. Spain (your favourites perhaps?): 45 million. That's right, Spain is a 'smaller' country than England. Aregntina's population is 40 million. This argument fails. In fact, the notion that England winning a World Cup would be similar to Greece winning the European Championship just smacks of self-indulgent, po faced English self-hatred that rises to surface every time there's a major sporting competition. We don't have to feel embarrassed about having a good team that may have a realistic chance of winning, then hark back to a romanticised ideal of a flair Brazilian or Latin country being better than us for quite superficial reasons.

JSHIR5, it's quite obvious, as with a lot of other Englishmen, that you don't want England to win, and you'll get a certain kick out of seeing us fail at the first hurdle. You may as well lay your cards on the table and admit that.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 40.00%
    6 votes
  • 4
    0 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2 13.33%
    2 votes
  • 1 46.67%
    7 votes

average rating:
2.73 from 15 votes