fonzilla
Well-Known Member
Belgium y France tambienHave most of their talent overseas. And are all better than England.
Belgium y France tambienHave most of their talent overseas. And are all better than England.
If this was directed at me clearly woooooosh on my point…Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Colombia, Switzerland.
I agree with that I just think it'd be good for English players to leave the country/maybe for the FA if they reely wanted to help the National Team to make stricter rules on amount of England players they play. Of course that wouldn't be popular with the huge clubs that barely ever even play English players anymore so I doubt they'd even consider it.Ok going through the top teams rosters, I get what you are saying, as the top teams are sub 50% English player. I still think that speaks more to the overratedness of English talent.
IMO they should go where they can play especially the mid-tier guys… I think my main point was the high level of the EPL is screwing English football because the teams are bringing in the best foreign players who are squeezing out English players who aren't superstars who could become useful.So English players should go abroad, yes
But most countries guys will come up through their youth team (and if they aren't the elite elite guys) play with that team for a while before moving onto another team. Some guys develop later not everyone is a superstar when they're 20 especially roles players. If not that many guys get to play in the EPL then how are you suppose to find lesser level guys who fill gaps and could eventually find their form/fitness right before a WC? Also the less guys from your country who play the less chances that one of them becomes good without consistent game experience.
I'm not familiar enough to know if the fringe type English guys just go to Dempsey level Championship or other countries though...
Europeans love to give Americans shit about only speaking 1 language, but how many Brits speak a second language either? I feel like one of the reasons few of them play abroad is because it's much more difficult for an English-only speaker to learn another language in their 20s or 30s as opposed to someone who already speaks 2-3 languages coming to England and learning English (a language they probably already have familiarity with anyways).
Much easier for people like Drogba or Torres to go to England than Gerrard or Lampard to go play in France, Spain, or Italy - linguistically at least.
At least for American players, there are other countries where English is widely spoken - Scandinavia, Low Countries, etc. But an American playing in Denmark or Belgium is considered good for development. I feel like an English player playing in Denmark or Belgium would probably be looked down on due to the reputation of those leagues - people would say "why play for Copenhagen when you could play for Sunderland instead?" or whatever.
Brits don't give us shit about it because they do it too. Anglophones just don't really learn second languages.
Meh, the Russians have a tougher time playing outside their own country than the British do.
Brits don't give us shit about it because they do it too. Anglophones just
Not enough vodka abroad?
So that Italy Uruguay game is gonna be fun. Uruguay needs a win to go through, right? Bart Scott.
Uragay advances with a draw by way of goals scored, no?
However many they want to pay FIFA for...100% serious: does CONCACAF get 4 or 4.5 bids next WC if this continues? They should certainly get at least a half bid from CAF and/or AFC