Why are the English so bad in football?

Question

Just rephrasing a question I asked in the WC section, and moving it to where it belongs.

Answer 1

I would say that #1 is they are not very skillful at all. Hello, Frank Lampard--the net is this way! They seem clumsy on the ball and have for years esp. their defenders. They have never really developed a Beckenbauer, Roberto Carlos, etc. sicne Bobby Moore.

#2 is to improve those ball skills their players need to play outside Britain. Probably the most successful period for the nat'l team since 1966 was when Keegan, Woodcock et al played in Germany or Italy and Land of Eng started qualifying for World Cup Finals. Bringing "foreigners" into the EPL has not helped...the Englsih guys have got to be exposed to the outside world (and the heat) on a more regular basis to actually improve.

#3--island mentality. Seems like they think they know better. Unwillingness to open their minds up to different ways of playing
and learning from other nations. sadly, that's the English. They're slow to change.

Answer 2

Sorry, it is not wrong football. They played very well in a confued situation. As you can see all the payers are super as compared to others. It is aggregate problem and primarily the coach's problem. In my assumption the core four problems are:
1. The coach is wrong primarily. What is this new system without attacking force . In a battle you shouldn't win by using long range missals only. The mid fielders are like that.
2. The team doesn't have psychological adivisor, I guess. If they have, he should clarify the reason why the payers are shaking.
3. The young boy did a big mistake that he will compensate us in the future.
4. We the fun and journalists expected more, which has psychological impacts on the player
Finally, forget and prepare for South Africa. By the way who will be the next coach?

Answer 3

First, this is an answer for the question that was asked by the man before me (2nd answerer). It called Football because you actually use your feet most of the time in the match to kick the ball, not bring it in your hands like American Football. The question should be, why do Americans refer to that sport as Football, despite the fact that they hold the ball in their arms for most of the time and only kick it once in a while.

Okay, now to the real question. The English aren't bad in football. They are quite good. They're just not lucky, especially in WC 2006. Their coach couldn't make a solid team, despite he had Gerrard and Lampard in the midfield. Lucky for the English, they change their coach. Hopefully he will bring England a lot of good luck and good performance.

Answer 4

actually the english are very good, its just that they took on a good portuguese team in the world cup. portugal was one pk and several missed shots away from pulling an upset over france( and thus making the final). if i were the english i would lay off on talking down portugal and instead pump them up since it would only reflect well on them since it was a close game between the two teams.

final conclusion: the english are good at soccer/football and their fans should quit whining when they lose close ones cause it only ,makes them look like losers instead of showing how good they played.

Answer 5

They concentrate too much on the fame and wealth and the surface stuff. Like who's the handsomest player and/or coach and all the perks that come with the game and not on the game and it's true depth and beauty.

Answer 6

They suck. Their womans softball team got beat 15-0 by the USA yesterday. Game was called in the fifth inning.

Answer 7

the English are good but the are just under achievers when it comes to the world cup

Answer 8

Oh you mean Soccer. Why do they have to call it Football? Guess that is another question I will have to ask.

Answer 9

Their fans put too high expectation in them and they always being condemn if the made mistakes.

Answer 10

Their not bad. But they don't alwayz try and reach for the top. Their fine with mediocerty.