Ok, so England have reached the last eight, and thats the main thing. But are we EVER going to see Theo Walcott used? Surely the best time for Sven to have used him was against Trinidad, when he would have been playing against technically inferior players. But no, Sven went for safety first and Walcott still sits twiddling his thumbs on the bench.
From now on, England will only be playing top class opposition..which makes it even harder still for Sven to risk throwing on an untried schoolboy.
So you have to wonder, if he was never intending to play him for even five minutes...why did Sven pick Walcott in the England squad in the first place??
2006-06-25 06:48:24 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football ➔ FIFA World Cup (TM)
Easy...publicity....trying to make the English public focus on something else than those harsh comments he had made
2006-06-25 06:51:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The last great sportsman by the name of Walcott I remember was a Cricketer.
Regarding the young England footballer, it is really a pity that he did not get a chance when it would have been easy.
But Sven G. Eriksson is a strange man and I do not think he is a great football coach. Then again, he is Swedish and does not feel the same for England as English people do.
I never understood why he was chosen for the job in the first place. Was it really so bad that England could not find a single capable Englishman to take charge of the national team?
What I have seen from England so far was disappointing, even though they slipped through to the Quarter Finals by playing so far inferior teams. The test will come with Portugal or Holland next Saturday, and I would not be surprised if England would be on the way home next Sunday.
2006-06-25 07:20:06 · answer #2 · answered by Sean F 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My theory as to why Walcott was originally selected is as follows:- Rooney was injured when originally selected-It was anticipated that he (Rooney) would not be ready to play a part in the World Cup before the first round or Quarter finals at the earliest. Sven needed a player that could run at defences at pace and make link up play with the striker(s) -All the stats on Walcott showed that he had that blistering pace and other proven skills that measured up well. The only negative being no experience at this level. He was never included as a straight replacement for Owen or crouch. Rooney's quicker than expected recovery has meant that there is no reason to use Walcott unless Rooney is injured. His selection was purely as a last resort never as a first. I'm surprised none of the expert pundits on TV have stated what appears to me to be a logical fact. Why else take an inexperienced player unless he can offer something that others can't? Neither Defoe or Bent can offer a link up from Midfield to attack hence the selection of Walcott.
Unfortunately, Owen's injury merely states the obvious, (with hindsight) that we are still a proven striker short.
2006-06-26 05:38:31 · answer #3 · answered by ROBERT D 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree - but maybe Sven just wanted him to have the experience of being in Germany for the World Cup - so he gets the flavour for future years.
I guess Sven might bring him in for the last couple of minutes of a game that we are definitely winning. Say when we are 5 goals up on Germany......
2006-06-25 06:59:41 · answer #4 · answered by Suzita 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
ya i am thinking the same
crouch is very bad and i think the new gunner walcott should be used
it is high time sven uses some quality players as owen is out , crouch doing something , rooney doing nothing , walcott may prove to be good
walcott will surely prove to be good with his lightning speed , good skills and on target shots.
2006-06-25 07:00:18 · answer #5 · answered by avi 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
An elephant has different sets of teeth..one to show off other to chew.....Walcott is just to show off. Sven thinks he has a gem in his store...But only God knows wether it is true gem or ordinary stone coz Eriksson is never gonna show it. And its true that he must had given Theo a spare chance against TRI............
2006-06-25 06:57:56 · answer #6 · answered by Gaurab N 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh...don't you know Sven is ****, eat **** and gonna bring down England. They should have get rid off him long before the qualifying round.Itis really a pity. The team is great but they are in ......hand.
2006-06-25 07:06:40 · answer #7 · answered by khutswe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only point of Walcott is to try to impress the world bringing the youngest player, but I think its totally irresponsible to bring someone so inexperienced to the world cup.
2006-06-25 06:56:57 · answer #8 · answered by mangueric 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it must be pretty frustrating being walcott right now. if he doesn't get him on sven is going to look a right a r s e
2006-06-25 07:42:23 · answer #9 · answered by STEPHEN W 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ronaldo was at the 1994 World Cup aged 17, and he didn't play.
2006-06-25 07:19:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No point unless it is to bring on the oranges at half time.
If we had brought Defoe then we would have more options.
Still England till I die even if the manager isn't!
2006-06-25 06:52:37 · answer #11 · answered by happy_hammer 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋