This discussion is closed.
Bigcnee
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#21
Report 17 years ago
#21
(Original post by DanMushMan)
blah, blah , blah
Clearly you're only defending international football because I support Arsenal, which is fine.
How arrogant of you!

I really couldn't care less who you support.
0
DanMushMan
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#22
Report 17 years ago
#22
(Original post by Bigcnee)
How arrogant of you!

I really couldn't care less who you support.
again, which is fine, but your argument that international teams are better that top club teams is wrong.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#23
Report 17 years ago
#23
(Original post by DanMushMan)
again, which is fine, but your argument that international teams are better that top club teams is wrong.
Give me an appropriate example.
0
DanMushMan
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#24
Report 17 years ago
#24
(Original post by Bigcnee)
Give me an appropriate example.
england
the top rated keeper plays in the nationwide div
there's no leftsided midfielder. A lot of the team who play wouldn't get into top club sides.
There are good players in the top international teams, of which there are a few, there would have to be. But you wouldn't look at any country's first 11 and and say they have a great player in every position. Not only that, but the fact that squads don't link up very often means its harder for players to gel. Look at Kluivert and van Nistelrooy, they can't play together.
There will be more quality and exciting football in the Champion's League than in the European finals.
0
Juwel
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#25
Report 17 years ago
#25
Why why why??? Why all the changes?!?! If we lose another friendly I will apply for Sven's job!

By the way, these are who I would pick as certainties for the England squad in 2004:

Paul Robinson
Gary Neville
Rio Ferdinand
Sol Campbell
John Terry
Matthew Upson
Ashley Cole
Wayne Bridge
David Beckham
Paul Scholes
Steven Gerrard
Nicky Butt
Frank Lampard
Phil Neville
Michael Owen
Wayne Rooney
Kieron Dyer
Darius Vassell

Might discuss the fringe players in another post...
0
Juwel
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#26
Report 17 years ago
#26
(Original post by DanMushMan)
england
the top rated keeper plays in the nationwide div
there's no leftsided midfielder. A lot of the team who play wouldn't get into top club sides.
There are good players in the top international teams, of which there are a few, there would have to be. But you wouldn't look at any country's first 11 and and say they have a great player in every position. Not only that, but the fact that squads don't link up very often means its harder for players to gel. Look at Kluivert and van Nistelrooy, they can't play together.
There will be more quality and exciting football in the Champion's League than in the European finals.
I agree with Dan on this one, of course club sides are better than national sides! There's a wider range of players for the clubs to choose from, not just the 'best of England', say.
0
DanMushMan
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#27
Report 17 years ago
#27
(Original post by ZJuwelH)
Why why why??? Why all the changes?!?! If we lose another friendly I will apply for Sven's job!

By the way, these are who I would pick as certainties for the England squad in 2004:

Paul Robinson
Gary Neville
Rio Ferdinand
Sol Campbell
John Terry
Matthew Upson
Ashley Cole
Wayne Bridge
David Beckham
Paul Scholes
Steven Gerrard
Nicky Butt
Frank Lampard
Phil Neville
Michael Owen
Wayne Rooney
Kieron Dyer
Darius Vassell

Might discuss the fringe players in another post...
yeah, um sven may, you know, may just want to pick another 2 keepers, just incase anything would happen to robinson. Don't really think we want Phil Neville in goal do we? James will be picked and be first choice.
0
Juwel
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#28
Report 17 years ago
#28
(Original post by DanMushMan)
yeah, um sven may, you know, may just want to pick another 2 keepers, just incase anything would happen to robinson. Don't really think we want Phil Neville in goal do we? James will be picked and be first choice.
I personally wouldn't pick James, I much prefer Kirkland, but I haven't put him down because he hasn't got any games in this season. Though Phil's in such good form he can play anywhere...
0
DanMushMan
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#29
Report 17 years ago
#29
(Original post by ZJuwelH)
I personally wouldn't pick James, I much prefer Kirkland, but I haven't put him down because he hasn't got any games in this season. Though Phil's in such good form he can play anywhere...
yeh, phil's my pin up.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#30
Report 17 years ago
#30
(Original post by ZJuwelH)
I agree with Dan on this one, of course club sides are better than national sides! There's a wider range of players for the clubs to choose from, not just the 'best of England', say.
This only applies to the few clubs that can afford them.

e.g. Real Madrid, Chelsea.

I am still confident that France, Brazil, Italy, Argentina could beat any other team apart from these two. (It would of course be close)

If not for quality, International football means more, which makes it more interesting.
0
Juwel
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#31
Report 17 years ago
#31
(Original post by Bigcnee)
This only applies to the few clubs that can afford them.

e.g. Real Madrid, Chelsea.

I am still confident that France, Brazil, Italy, Argentina could beat any other team apart from these two. (It would of course be close)

If not for quality, International football means more, which makes it more interesting.
But the few clubs that can afford them are the clubs you were arguing don't play as good football as the national teams (the debate was about top Premiership clubs, which barring Arsenal encompasses your statement of affordability).

Any of the top teams in England, Italy or Spain could defeat an international team of the calibre of France, say. And easily the nation from which these clubs come. Ronaldo vs Spain? Henry or van Nistelrooy vs England? Shevchenko vs Italy? No contest.
0
byb3
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#32
Report 17 years ago
#32
(Original post by DanMushMan)
so u prefer internationals do you?
When you compare the competitions such as the European Championships and the World Cup to mere club football the differences are obvious.

When the World Cup is on the whole world takes an interest (apart from those yanks who wouldn't know football if it hit them on the head) and the frenzy around the world is amazing.

I know I got the craziest and happiest feeling when South Korea beat Italy, and when we beat Denmark 3-0. There is so much more enthusiasm in international football because the world is watching you.

I think many footballers would agree that they prefer the internationals to club football. It means you have reached the pinnacle of your sport, and you have the chance to show it.

I can't wait for Euro 2004! and World cup 2006 for that matter (in Germany as well so might actually get a chance to see a match).

Adam
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#33
Report 17 years ago
#33
(Original post by ZJuwelH)
But the few clubs that can afford them are the clubs you were arguing don't play as good football as the national teams (the debate was about top Premiership clubs, which barring Arsenal encompasses your statement of affordability).

Any of the top teams in England, Italy or Spain could defeat an international team of the calibre of France, say. And easily the nation from which these clubs come. Ronaldo vs Spain? Henry or van Nistelrooy vs England? Shevchenko vs Italy? No contest.
I'm saying the top international teams are better than the best club teams.

Van Nistelrooy and Henry don't play for the same club.

Like many of the top players dont play for the same clubs.
Real Madrid could beat any international team (if you could clone players), but I am confident the other top international teams could beat the other top club teams.

If you ask players which they'd rather play in - the Champions League or the European Championships, I'm sure they'd say the latter.
0
Eru Iluvatar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#34
Report 17 years ago
#34
(Original post by ZJuwelH)
Why why why??? Why all the changes?!?! If we lose another friendly I will apply for Sven's job!

By the way, these are who I would pick as certainties for the England squad in 2004:

Paul Robinson
Gary Neville
Rio Ferdinand
Sol Campbell
John Terry
Matthew Upson
Ashley Cole
Wayne Bridge
David Beckham
Paul Scholes
Steven Gerrard
Nicky Butt
Frank Lampard
Phil Neville
Michael Owen
Wayne Rooney
Kieron Dyer
Darius Vassell

Might discuss the fringe players in another post...
Robinson certainly isn't first choice. James, although in a lower division, has proven a competant keeper, but i agree, is only a stop gap until the likes of Robinson and Kirkland develop. I would also argue a place, possibly for Richard Wright, if england take 3 keepers.
0
pkonline
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#35
Report 17 years ago
#35
Give Ian Walker a go. He's always on the bench but he should be given a go in friendly. Why they never use him but draft him into the squad I'll never understand. Sven makes loads of changes per game but our Ian never has a go.
0
Eru Iluvatar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#36
Report 17 years ago
#36
(Original post by pkonline)
Give Ian Walker a go. He's always on the bench but he should be given a go in friendly. Why they never use him but draft him into the squad I'll never understand. Sven makes loads of changes per game but our Ian never has a go.
Walker is past his best, and i can think of many keepers with better claims to the england squad than him.
0
Eru Iluvatar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#37
Report 17 years ago
#37
(Original post by Bigcnee)
I'm saying the top international teams are better than the best club teams.

Van Nistelrooy and Henry don't play for the same club.

Like many of the top players dont play for the same clubs.
Real Madrid could beat any international team (if you could clone players), but I am confident the other top international teams could beat the other top club teams.

If you ask players which they'd rather play in - the Champions League or the European Championships, I'm sure they'd say the latter.
The top club teams have played together in game after game for a couple of seasons at least. The international sides do not have a chance to gel when they play, so in a match between a top club and top international side, i believe that the club side could have it.
0
pkonline
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#38
Report 17 years ago
#38
(Original post by Iluvatar)
Walker is past his best, and i can think of many keepers with better claims to the england squad than him.
Sven thinks he's good. I think he's good. He's a 1st choice Prem keeper. More than James. Plus Robinson is in a struggling side.
0
pkonline
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#39
Report 17 years ago
#39
(Original post by Iluvatar)
The top club teams have played together in game after game for a couple of seasons at least. The international sides do not have a chance to gel when they play, so in a match between a top club and top international side, i believe that the club side could have it.
Unless the top club side has lots of internationals .
0
Eru Iluvatar
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#40
Report 17 years ago
#40
(Original post by pkonline)
Sven thinks he's good. I think he's good. He's a 1st choice Prem keeper. More than James. Plus Robinson is in a struggling side.
James is a better player, and so is Robinson, regardless of his clubs problems.
And what about Kirkland, and Wright? They are both better than Walker in my opinion.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Which of these would you use to help with making uni decisions?

Webinars (34)
13.88%
Virtual campus tours/open days (53)
21.63%
Live streaming events (24)
9.8%
Online AMAs/guest lectures (24)
9.8%
A uni comparison tool (57)
23.27%
An in-person event when available (53)
21.63%

Watched Threads

View All