As much as I love Joe hosting these talks, I thought Alex worked really well as a double pivot here, shuffling the conversation around the table, creating space for JJ and Seb.

Alex' version of absolutely thrilled is equivalent to mildy disinterested in any real human

Alex, extatic as always. JJ looking goofy as ever. Seb's knowledge as well rounded as his head. love your work

I remember Heskey being called a donkey SO MUCH when he played. The argument was that he didn't score many goals. That was obviously never his purpose, which blew the general fans mind at that point.

Problem is, those 3 were essentially the same player. Their midfield partners up to this point of their careers (2004) were, Keane, Petit/Makelele, Hamman. Is not only that they didn't have an understanding, but that they never needed to have an understanding because SLG were the ones bombing forward with their partners mopping behind them. Reality is, they probably needed to drop 2 of these and replace with them Hargreaves and Cole. In Euro 2004, teams were either midfield 3 (Greece, Sweden, Italy) or a midfield two with pairing such as Viera/Makelele, Maniche and Costinha, Albelda and Baraja, Cocu and Davids. These guys have reputation as great tacklers, the English trio did not. England had to be playing with Hargreaves and Butt to emulate that. Also at this point, all 3 of Scholes, Lampard and Gerard haven't been that versatile yet, Scholes was not yet a deep lying midfielder, and Gerard haven't really ventured into more attacking roles, they were firmly "8s". This midfield was never going to work, is as ludicrous as playing 3 left backs. The other problem is that none of these guys were ever dribblers either. Zidane played wider than usual but he is Zidane. Del Piero shunted to the left too, but he is a dribbler too. The midfield 4 of England aren't known to progress with the ball, they either kick it forward, or at best do a "powerful" run down the middle when there is space. Looking bad, this formation was just weird, like you realistically could only fit 2 of those 4 in a balanced midfield, or push one of them up. They were really reliant on magic from Rooney to disrupt the defense despite the attacking talent, and were toothless without him, which makes you wonder what was the point of the midfield. Sven had less leeway than most as well, he was the first foreign manager to manage the English National team, and the players famously hated each other due to club rivalries. The formation wasn't really the issue, the players picked was something else.

Alex is the classic meme of the person who everyone wants to hug but who does not ever want to be hugged

It's like how Italy tried to shoe horn Del Piero and Totti into the same time...and then stopped trying...and then 2006 happened

For all the "golden generation" stuff, the squad lacked in a lot of areas. E.g. no good pacey wingers, no midfielders who could dribble etc. 352 with Beckham and Ashley Cole wide, and Hargreaves in for one of the 3 CMs was probably the best bet, but still not ideal as Hargreaves wasn't on the level of Makelele etc, Owen wasn't the same after his injury, and we lacked dribblers. Throw in the toxic press environment, and the fact that the players were frankly a set of knobheads and it's not surprising they never won anything

Really enjoyed that. Seb was brilliant at bringing in the "context" of English football back in the 90s and 00s. Certain players "couldn't be dropped". Also keeping the ball was not in the Premier League nearly as much as it was now. The league was all pace and power. Arsenal were probably the only possession heavy team then and even they could "mix it" in that era with Campbell, Keown, Viera and Gilberto. During lockdown the BBC showed a lot of old euros games and I decided to rematch the England v Croatia game. What surprised me was how well Gerrard and Scholes played. Scholes started on the left. His movement inside to create space for Ashley Cole and create overloads were brilliant. Gerrard dropped into the 6 role better than my memory had remembered and Rooney was at his utter best, playing the 10 role with maturity and cuteness that is barely believable for a player of his age at the time. Add to that his pace, power and directness at times, it made him the biggest weapon at that tournament. Lampard did look a little bit lost in truth but he wasn't the biggest issue (in that particular game anyway). He managed a goal with a typical midfield run and finish. The huge problem was David Beckham. I was stunned by how poor he was. I'm a big fan of Beckham and he is often underrated because of his celebrity but in this system it was he who was the problem. Scholes and Gerrard knitted play together effectively but Beckham hit countless long booming passes towards Owen that often hit him at throat height when he was marked by multiple defenders or Beckham would just play for territory. It was the sort of display that Neville and Carragher would rip apart on modern day Monday Night Football because the amount of passes that were misplaced etc. Once Rooney had emerged England were a 4-2-3-1 and not a 4-4-2 because Rooney always dropped deeper. Beckham needed the 4-4-2 when he was on the right so his crossing was useful and he could hit long vertical passes and a Shearer or Heskey could hold it up. I agree with the lads that a Hargreaves and then in 06 and beyond, a Carrick was a must but 3 midfielders in the title did well. Maybe a Joe Cole for Beckham might have helped at that time ??

Love the commitment from that JJ fella to have a haircut straight out of the mid 2000s for this vid

We had Carrick and Hargreaves at the time to balance that team out. Sven didn’t have the balls to drop one of them for tactical reasons which is why we failed over and over…

you also didnt mention the dressing room issue at the time. there are some interviews from rooney saying that the dressing room was toxic because none of the players could leave their club loyalties at the door. cant imagine this would help at all with chemistry on the pitch

Lol so this seems to say, in order to make this work, you’d need Crouchy or Heskey up front with Rooney, and keep only 1 of Scholes, Gerrard or Lampard in the midfield next to a Carrick, Hargreaves or Butt. Impossible with the press culture around England at the time!

I loved Owen Hargreaves so much. From the United Champions League winning side he was always my favourite. So intelligent, free kick demon and much more technical than he's given credit for. Such a shame he was so injury prone.

It's interesting comparing then to now. Southgate has implemented a far more accomplished midfield in Rice and Phillips, yet the irony with the casual football fan is that England now get criticized for playing '2 DMs.'

more Alex as host please!!!!!!!!!!!!!

At around 13:20 one of the guys talks about spain being unable to fit all their central midfield players in the one team. Well they were the only team that could, there was times where they played at least 5 possibly 6 central midfield players. If I remember correctly at times they played Busquets, Xabi, Xavi Silva, Fabregas, Iniesta Iniesta was playing off the left which was somewhere he would often find himself for Barcelona anyways but most players wouldn’t be able to make the change. As far as I know Fabregas never played as a false 9 apart from for Spain but in their Tiki taka era that’s what he had to do to start. Another very difficult change but an intelligent player and a different system making it work. David silva played on the right wing, I think he may have done this at several points of his career but again, great player great system made it work. Obviously busquets was the deepest of the midfield 3 beside Xabi and Xavi basically played similarly to how he played at barca as far as I know. At times David villa would have played and so would Fernando Torres or Pedro at a slightly later stage

I loved this video - it seemed like you enjoyed making it too! One idea I’ve not heard elsewhere is a 352 that’s also sort of secretly a 442 that has all three midfielders and it works because of Jamie Carragher. What I mean is - play a back three with Ferdinand (or Terry or Campbell) flanked by Gary Neville on the right and Jamie Carragher on the left. Carragher famously trained his left foot to force his way into Liverpool’s treble winning team as a left back before Benitez made him a starting centre back in 04. Neville played right of a three for Glen Hoddle. This back 3 with Ashley Cole and David Beckham providing width in midfield gives the flexibility of having a back three, four or five at any given moment - Cole can drop in and Neville becomes the right back, for example. With this platform, you could play Gerrard and Scholes as a midfield two, with the security of an extra man behind them while they gel as a pair. Lampard has the freedom to exploit space in the final third, and a partnership of Owen/Rooney or Owen/Heskey leads the line. Beckham, Scholes and Gerrard can all distribute long balls, in Carragher and Ferdinand/Terry there’s decent technical ability on the ball in defence, there’s width on the left from Cole, a functioning strike partnership and none of the superstars have been dropped. I’d love someone to explain why that doesn’t work so I can shut up about it. Any takers?

Thank you JJ for noting that Gerrard was at his peak as a second striker behind Torres. That partnership was phenomenal.

Great vid. Brought back a lot of memories. Think one thing G Southgate has done that people really underestimate is that he ha managed to establish a dominance over the team which makes it very difficult for people to pressure him. He may make bad calls, but at least they're his calls. Tough for players like James Madison though.

I wish I could be so productive, fun and informative next to building work. Thanks for another great video about something I always wondered about! Cheers

Alex did a perfectly good job of hosting yet there was something deeply unsettling about the arrangement like some sort of cosmic unbalance to the situation indicative of an eldrich horror simmering just below the suface of reality. Great video tho.

This England side (like so many!) was crying out for a break from the standard 4-4-2 setup. 4-3-3 would have been brilliant 3-5-2 would also have worked well with the incredible depth of top class CBs we had (imagine if Ledley King could stay fit!)

Do more of these types of videos. I love them!

Imo it makes no sense to leave Scholes out and play Gerrard in that deep role. Scholes is the clear metronome out of all 3 and miles beyond the others in a deeper role. And Gerrard is the one man army kinda player who would get fired up and antsy waiting on the bench. Start Scholesy and sub Gerrard on if the team needs a lift, would be a much better plan I think.

As much as I despise this period of English football, I also think it was a very necessary watershed moment that stopped people from thinking the press or the average fan could do a better job picking and running the team. SGE basically just went with the most popular opinions of who should play and how, and they were absolute garbage. I don't think the British press (toxic as it still may be) would have gotten to the current level of tactical and technical appreciation without this era laying bare their ignorance of the game's deeper levels.

I never understood the clamour for Lampard when Hargreaves/Butt/Carrick were better for the team. Also, Beckham was such a threat from deep balls and Ashley Cole (who was arguably the best of this XI in an England shirt) on the left, that I never understood the need for Gary Neville to overlap on the right - that 1/3rd could have been ably done by Rooney. SGE was a WAG in disguise.

Brilliant content as always

You can now see why Sven liked players like Heskey and Crouch as you had the big man and then the small nippy player who played off him, Rooney was probably the game changer as he was the one England player who didnt really fit into that system and was probably ahead of his time. I think Capello was the first manager to try something different by playing Barry in midfield as he was the one who would sit deep and allow the likes of Gerrard and Lampard to get forward. Unfortunately he wasnt fit in the 2010 world cup so he was constantly getting caught out especially in the Germany game. After that World cup though he actually started to get a well functioning midfield playing Jack Wheelchair in the pivot role and moving Gerrard to a kind of inside left position which allowed Rooney to float but unfortunately like most England managers he got mired in scandals and they replaced him with Roy Codgerson and we went backwards again

Spot on analysis as always

If Unai Emery was around back then, he would’ve been the perfect manager for this team.

As Sven admitted on Sky: "What would the press say if I dropped one of them (Lampard Gerrard)?" Marketing Suits @ FA/Sponsors + Weak Manager + Press

It's also quite hard to win a major tournament... only happens once every two years. If we could take penalties we might've won one!

So who should have been in the starting 11 and what formation should they have played?

I love the jazz music in the background.

More of these please

I think there was a interview with Lampard, Gerrard and Rio Ferdinand where they said that it was down to ego and playing at different competitive clubs (Man Utd/Chelsea/Liverpool) that they didn't had the chemistry required to win matches. Plus, tactical systems.

i'm not going to lie, i loudly exclaimed "oh, yes!" seeing that you've done this vid. love you guys!

I seem to remember Gordon Strachan working as a pundit for the BBC on an England game in this era and saying “Ye cannae play all your best players. Ye cannae.”😄 That soundbite seemed to be full of sense to me at the time. I also seem to remember Steve McLaren trying to forge ahead without Beckham when he took over, moving Gerrard onto the right for a while. It certainly didn’t solve all the problems. England have rarely had anything approaching a complete team in all the years I’ve been watching them. A couple of pieces are nearly always missing.

Hargreaves actually did well for England but if I remember correctly he had a lot of injury problems.

I like how the Spanish team for 2008-2010 was brought up in this context, they had a similar problem as england of having team balance.

Golden age Tifo ❤

Similar happen in Brazil 06; Adriano and Ronaldo have the exactly same player style, but couldnt be sacked, so the team just give up any balance tactic to play them

Tifo has such an all star cast of personalities. Just turn on the cameras and they’re going to create something awesome every time

I do think Nicky Butt is an excellent suggestion for that screening player who could watch the backline. Pairing him with Hargreaves would have added a stronger potential for distributing the ball. At this point, a 4-2-3-1 looks like the best shape (or a asymmetrical 4-3-3). Personally, if we're playing that, I wouldn't pick Scholes since he's a better creator than Gerrard or Lampard, and distribution was a key element of his game. Lampard is who you want to spearhead an attack with fewer responsibilities (although people tend to forget he had admirable defensive numbers and clocked a high number of assists, not simply a goal scorer), but then you would have to sacrifice both Owen and Rooney for Heskey or Crouch, and as much as I love the idea of Crouch scoring a 96th minute World Cup Final winning goal (complete with his Robot dance celebration), I don't think it's a reasonable option. Gerrard's a nice medium, played a variety of positions during his career (deeper, out wide, behind the striker) and still guarantees goals. I'm a Chelsea fan, so making that choice is painful for me, but he has a connection to Owen, played with him for a number of years, and their relationship could mirror Gerrard's own with Torres (not identical players, not at all, but there are some similarities). This way you get defensive solidity, a level of distribution, Gerrard's passing and off-the-ball movement and the pace in behind of Owen. Wingers are, and always have been, another perennial issue for this England team. I agree with Joe Cole off the left, Beckham doesn't suit being a right winger who gets up and down the pitch, but if you look for fouls and make the most of set-pieces (vital in international competition) you can probably compensate for that. Naturally, dropping Rooney, Lampard and Scholes makes me feel filthy, but I think it's the best solution to the problem.

All over planet, coaches were trying to work out why England didn't build a team around Paul Scholes. Gerrard and Lampard were too similar and the point about modern players receiving the ball in tight areas and distributing the ball... Did they not watch him for United in the second half of his career?

3-5-2 GK DEFENDERS CAMPBELL-FERDINAND-TERRY WING BACKS BECKS-A.COLE MID CARRICK-LAMPARD-GERRARD STRIKERS ROONEY-HESKEY Yeah man.. Heskey.. He played a lot for this exact reason. Owen as super sub or against teams with a high line.

352 England had 4 or 5 top class center backs at the time and G Neville could also be included as a right sided center back. Ferdinand in the center acting as a sweeper in a 3 with G neville to his right and Terry to his left. Beckham holding the width on the right giving him space to deliver those perfect crosses and cross field passes. Ashley Cole on the left. Scholes holding and controlling midfield allowing Gerrard and Lampard get forward like they did for there clubs. Owen on the shoulder of the last man and Rooney running riot like he did when he first burst onto the scene. Cole's pace could cover Terry's lack of and G Neville being able to defend in wide areas covering Beckhams lesser defensive nous.

Never knew J. Cole, before breaking out into the mainstream as a rapper, sat on the England bench. Great come up story

3-5-2 with king sweeping, Terry on the left and Ferdinand on the right of the back 3. Terry could be the sweeper, no idea what king was like as a player and if he could play lcb. Beckham right wing back is the compromise but Ferdinand behind him should offer solidity defensively and he will cut inside anyway, not a byline wingback, Ashley Cole suits left wing back well, gerrard and lampard the advancing 8's with scholes slightly deeper. If all 3 occupy the same position basically then there's more chance at least one will hold back time to time. Owen and Rooney as the forward 2, both capable of playmaking and starting from a wider position to assist the wing backs in attack. Rooney as the left sided forward to cut inside

Alfie from HITC Sevens referenced this selection in a recent video - he mentioned how Hoddle had tried a back 3 with wing backs and that this could have been used here. James Campbell, Ferdinand, Terry Beckham, Gerrard, Scholars, Lampard, A. Cole Rooney, Owen I wonder why no one thought of this sort of solution at the time - Gary Neville misses out but someone has to.

I remember there being a lot of noise in the early '00s about playing Alan Thompson (ex- of Celtic) on the left side for England. He only got one token cap in the end - how useful would he have been, actually?

The best solution is a back 3. King 3rd centre back, becks right wing back, Cole left wing back and. You can play with 2 midfielders because the 3rd centre half compensates for 2 attacking midfielders.

I'm not an England fan, but there are some aspects of luck as well: 1996 - they were fortunate to get pass Spain, ref helped them, but this was probably the last time they received any luck in the major tournaments 1998 - quite bad luck to lose to Argentina with Beckham's send off and Campbell's goal disallowed 2000 - lost to Portugal and Romania when they were leading and just screwed up both games 2002 - solid performance, lost to Brazil which were the better team 2004 - lost in a PK heartbreaker against Portugal, Campbell again had a goal disallowed 2006 - lost in another PK heartbreaker against Portugal, playing with 10 men after Rooney got sent off 2008 - failed to quality by hiring the wrong guy for the job 2010 - we all know what happened against Germany If they had any luck between 1998-2010, who said the magic trio wouldn't have worked and the golden generation would have ended with no trophies?

England could have played with a 3-4-2-1 with Rio, JT and Carra/Campbell as the sweeper, Beckham/Neville as RWB, Cole LWB, Scholes and Hargreaves as more holding, Gerrard and Lampard as 10s where Rooney could have also come in and then Owen or Crouch up top.

Great, great video - I thought it was a simple fix but this discussion proves how wrong I was

Imagine that england team with a similar system to spain 2008-2012. Same back 4, midfield 3 hargreaves gerrard Lampard Joe cole right wing Michael Owen left wing and scholes false 9. I know there’s some players unfairly left out but I think that’s a quality line up

I genuinely think this could have worked brilliantly with these players. Assymetrical approach with ashley cole as an attacking wing back, Neville as a full back tucking into a back three in possession, utilising his defensive / positional abilities. Beckham as a true winger for width and crossing / passing threat. Then scholes deep lying play maker. Gerrard and lampard as box2box / mezzala. Rooney dropping deep and pulling out cbs for the midfielders to attack the space. Owen stretching the back line.

I always thought that, when he played, peter crouch actually solved a decent amount of the issues that england had in possession. The problem was in, as always, who didn't play because he was playing.

I've long suspected that England's press is the root of their issues around the national side. Most countries' press corps just support their national side and wish them well, but the English press always seems to be waiting to get self-righteous about some small criticism. It's very petty and makes it impossible to manage the national side.

Gerrard for as great a player he was. In this system had the tactical awareness of a plastic bag in the wind.

They could have played a diamond with Carrick at the back, Gerrard and Scholes alongside each other and Lampard as the attacking midfielder for when Beckham couldn't play. When he could, Scholes would play deeper, Becks would tuck in as a central midfielder (he could do that, i.e. 1999 UCL final) alongside Gerrard and then Lampard as the AM.

Great video as always. I’d love to see a preview video/series for AFCON in the same way that you did for the Euros.

Very appropriate point about the lack of credible left sided players. Always felt that Steve Guppy looked like he had a wand of a left foot when crossing for Leicester but I don’t remember him being given a chance got England. Eriksson ultimately has to take the majority of the blame for this side’s failings.

Sven played one of the most technically gifted English central midfielders ever on the left wing!! Scholes ran games for United and could have done the same for England. Sven, however chose to play Gerrard and Lampard in central midfield.

That England should have played a 4 -3- 3 like this: Bad Goalkeeper Neville - Ferdinand - Terry - A. Cole Gerrard or Lampard - Hargreaves or Carrick - Scholes Beckham + Owen or Rooney + Joe Cole This way you solve the Gerrard/Lampard problem, you got a balanced team and have 3 good subs for each match. Games are played and won with 14 (nowdays 16) players not only the starting 11. The bad goalkeeper problem didn't have a solution after Seaman retired until Joe Hart came to the top level.

Muy bueno pa 🤙

Agree about the lack of balance in the team, and that less talented players could have sit better within the system we were trying to play. But if Sven didn't have the balls to drop ANY of these players, at the very least he could have switched to a formation that would have better accommodated them. 4-4-2 diamond would have improved things. Scholes sat dictating behind Beckham and Gerrard, both very hard workers who would get forward and back to support Scholes in defence. Lampard behind the strikers, who both had decent pace so could have run the channels (Which Rooney did a LOT for United), and then more natural width from Neville and Cole.

personally I've always thought carrick was the mossing link, even at the time I was saying drop lampard, push gerard to the left, carrick and hargreaves in the middle with scholes ahead of him

Only hope would be a 4-1-4-1. One of Beckham or Owen would have to sit. Scholes quit in 2004. I would have begged for him to come back and built the team around him. He was and still is the best English player I have seen in my time watching football. Immaculate passer and integral to ManU’s ability to play passing, offensive football.

"Today I'm absolutely thrilled to be joined...." Yeah, you seem like it.

Got me thinking about Henry, Salah, and Suarez as an attacking trio and how fun that would be to watch

Please do an analysis of why ralf rangnick's football hasnt clicked in man united

Scholes, Gerrard and Lampard were all box to box midfielders whom like to get forward. They had a anchor man behind them to allow them to roam and play a more creative way. Who's the main play-maker when 3 are playing simultaneously? It's a shame that 3 world-class/ all-star/central midfield group weren't as compatible on the field as it would seem on Paper.

You're not old enough to remember these players and they're like superheroes to you. You're making a lot of this up.

Yeah, we can see Alex really thrill 😂😂 to host this video

Bad example with Spain, they won the Euros starting Busquets, Alonso, Xavi, Iniesta, Cesc and Silva, Spain definitely did just play all the midfielders

I want that electric sabbuteo table for my birthday

The problem they/Sven had wasn't so much as the players at his disposal. It was the inflexibility of both formation and tactics. Against France for example - they (unsurprisingly) had fewer shots on goal and France were better across nearly every metric, yet left it until 70min to make any changes from a rigid 442 and Hargreaves and or Butt should have played from the offset. Where as against Switzerland Sven could have played a more offensive team. And yet whilst they won easily, he made the same substitution at 70 min. Off came Scholes and on went, yep you guessed... Hargreaves.

352 Neville, Rio, JT Becks, Scholes (sitting), Lamps, Gerrard, A. Cole Owen, Rooney

Crouch and Lampard as a partnership maybe ? Given the fact Lampard played with someone like Drogba who was not necessarily a lethal Goalscorer but a Great Hold up player for him . Lampard would have been a great option as a second striker tbh 4-4-2 diamond of Hargreaves Scholes Gerrard Beckham in the midfield Lampard as a second Striker option Rooney as a sub if you want impact , I completely forgot about him

3-5-2 would probably be the best formation. James on Hk Rio, Terry and neville(ledley king, etc as back up) A.Cole on the left, Beckham on the right Hargreaves as dm with Gerrard and scholes in front(because they drift wider than Lampard which can help the flanks) Rooney and owen are also similar. İ would pick rooney with a target man. When leading the game can replace the TM with owen for counter attacks.

The “when to go and when to stay” issue between a midfield pair isn’t tough to work out. One sees the other is attacking he must stay home, if he’s behind you defending then you can burst forward to assist with the attack. Only thing that destroys it is ego and stubbornness, and that’s for the gaffer to sort out.

6 world class players (genuinely) - maybe 7 - each arguably the best player in the world in their position - Ferdinand, Cole, Scholes, Gerrard, Beckham, Lampard, Rooney. You could suggest Terry too. People suggest the argument that they underperformed is erroneous, but its not. Compare to the present day England side - where you have perhaps 1 "world class" player - in the form of Kane - and that is even debatable, and yet this side is reaching the finals/semi finals of European Championship/World Cups.

Lovely

The guy with the beard makes Jack Dee look like Graham Norton..... 🤣🤣🤣 Love the show

The problems were several. 1. A general tactical retardation on the island (that still exists to this day*) 2. The club rivalries that existed at the time (as stated by several players) 3. The extreme pressure from the fans and media 4. Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and more had "golden generations" as well And probably even more factors coming in to play than this. So let's look at how to remedy the symptoms of the first problem - namely the 4-4-2 (or 4-4-1-1 with Rooney dropping) Going back to a popular early 90's tactic - the 3-5-2 - could have easily worked better, and you can flip and turn the mid three in accordance to who you have playing. The problem here might be the general tendency for other teams to play 4-5-1 formations. Something akin to what Cesare Prandelli did as national coach for Italy with a shifting diamond of Pirlo, De Rossi, Montolivo and Aquilani could have worked but would have been unfamiliar and hard to coach. I think the 4-3-1-2 would have been the best option. You have a deep-lying playmaker in the middle (Scholes/Gerrard/Carrick/Hargreaves/Butt) flanked by Beckham on the right (who can also play right back (he played both of these roles in this system in his time at Milan) and Lampard/Gerrard/Scholes on the left. With a myriad of options for the role in "the hole". Beckham could roam to the flank or come in to the middle and balance the team (with Gary stretching the play (great understanding between these two BFFs)). On the left you have the box-box bomber and in the hole you can have another Lampard/Gerrard/Scholes, you can play Rooney and a target man up front, Joe cole can play here (as a central winger drifting to the flanks to create overloads or whatever he feels like doing really (like A. Sanches at Udinese)), you can play a target man striker here to knock balls down to the midfield runners or on to the strikers or you can just flip the front three entirely and have a pretty Ancelotti Christmas tree. All depending on what the match calls for. Maybe you need more cover for A. Cole's runs on the left so you play Hargreaves-Gerrard-Beckham and you give Becks more freedom to go forward and have Neville behind him and Scholes (not Lampard because you want to take advantage of player relations) in front of him. Put a target man or a rapid fox like Owen in the box and a Rooney on the right side and United will get the ball in the box for a goal. You have SO many options with such well-rounded players of such extreme quality, yet the rigidness of "Englishness" broke this teams potential. An adventurous 3-4-3 or another 3/5 backline system (or just that 3-5-2) could surely be conceived to fit 3 of King, Terry and Ferdinand/Campbell/Adams into the starting line. Maybe against teams playing 4-4-2 or other two striker formations (Czech republic etc.) * At least in the general populace and media (same goes for the Scandinavian countries (Norway in particular)- underlined by the lack of top quality English/British managers. Just have a look at the nationalities represented in this way throughout the top 5 leagues (the PL being the most globalized league perhaps also a factor admittedly)

England could have played Downinng left winger, Barry and Gerrard as the central midfielder then used Lampard advanced left hand side midfield as an inside left type player

I think the diamond 4-4-2 formation (i.e Italy '06) would've been the only way to successfully fit all of them in together. Rooney - Owen Gerrard - Lamps - Becks Scholes Cole - Terry - Rio - Neville James

I love JJ hahaha

the main problem was the same with the first galacticos mistake, played all the best players in your card doesn't work just like that, Lampard had Makelele in Chelsea, Scholes had Keane in Man Utd, Gerrard had Alonso in Liverpool, Madrid galacticos was not working because they sold Makelele and replace him with Beckhan which are no different with Guti.

Michael Carrick should have been playing behind Gerrard and Lampard after Scholes retired. Rooney up-front on his own. Beckham Wide Right. Joe Cole cutting in from the inside left. Defence as is with Ashley covering the space left by Joe when he cuts in on the left.

You go with Scholes and Gerrard. Both played primarily in a 2 at club level while Lampard operated best as the most advanced in Chelseas 3 so stylistically Scholes and Gerrard were better suited to the flat 442. Gerrard had some characteristics like Keane and Scholes had some like Alonso so Scholes and Gerrard could have worked well together. Plus given Lampards goal scoring ability and the fact he offers something a bit more different too the other two he offers you something different off the bench than what the other 2 could if you needed a game changed

It seemed obvious to me, but scholes and becks (work horse) as pivots gerrard wide right (best goal scoring season was there) Lamps amc and Rooney on the left drifting in with Cole overlapping Hargreaves instead of becks would have been better but Becks wasnt getting dropped

The pickles sticker on the laptop is excellent

To be fair. The only time we played all 3 in the same side was Euro04 and it did work for a little bit. Breifly. And if Rooney didn't get injured, maybe it might have been a different story in the history book

Additionally I think Gerrard and Beckham also overlap. Agree that Gerrard was best in that 10 area but the other position Benetiz used him in successfully was wide right, as he was a great passer and crosser and had legs to get up and down. So when Gerrard looked for spaces other than his usual in the 10 area spaces, he just ended up overlapping with Beckham. Plus with Owen and Rooney who had yet to learn to head, having the ability to cross the ball was totally pointless. Beckham was Captain and that dictated 442, due to him not being good enough to play Central and not fast enough to be a winger. Looking back, Rooney could've played off the left of a 3 and Gerrard could've maybe been right of a 3. With Hargreaves , Scholes, Lampard the midifeld 3 but it is still square pegs in round holes. In a really weird way, Scholes and Danny Murphy could've both been fantastic in a tiki taka style midfield but that was so far removed from the understood style of English football.

3-5-2 should have been tested against weaker opposition. RIO CAMPBELL TERRY BECKHAM GERRARD A.COLE SCHOLES LAMPARD ROONEY OWEN The irony is Venables or Hoddle may have tried this. Sven was a strict 4-4-2 coach during his Lazio days, plus every Premier League side was playing 4-4-2 during this era. Mourinho changed the English game when he joined Chelsea by playing 3 in midfield.

The thing that I've never understood was why Gerrard wasn't used as the sitting midfielder. Is it his "best" position? No. But his tackling and long passing were so good that he could definitely have played in that position. I can't imagine that Gerrard would've been so adamantly against it that he'd have thrown a fit.

even in 2010 there wasn't a competent forward and midfield balance, the exact same problem, 4 second striker players with good goal records, who've got in based on stats, it was defoe (off crouch, bent) , rooney (off berbatov), lampard, gerrard, barry, and i dont remember the 6th, against germany's very young ozil, muller, khedira, schweinsteiger, podolski? england played long ball because they were used to it and excelled in a game of it. could all do accurate long passes, and could all score from distance, were willing runners in behind, and back to defend but in south africa, that team was happy to drop off them and england would mindlessly long ball it at a 2v6 repeatedly, hoping they'd play their game and make it physical and about running. the awareness of tactics and strategy in england has come a long way. for an idea, all the CMs for the good teams in england from 2000 to 2010 as the premier league was becoming the best league, at the time weren't english; essein, alonso, vieira, keane, gilberto, hamann, baby fabregas. only scholes and carrick who still didn't get their position because of the allure of the free midfielders having good goal records. and even now managers fall into the honey trap of "goals from midfield" because goals win matches, donny van der beek, played as the 3rd CM, free CM, attacking mid, 2nd striker whatever u want to call it at ajax, when he had a good goal record. pogba at juve played in a free role with pirlo, and marchisio playing actual center mid. i do think people overhype that "golden generation" for england stuff, cos compare it to italy and brazil at the time they were in a diamond era, italy's didnt even bring maldini and had cannavaro, nesta, materazzi, and chiellini a juve starter didnt get a callup, and their 5th choice forward was inzaghi behind, luca toni, totti, del piero, and gilardino. it's nuts, i love football. and last thing to say, i think the depth of the england midfield; now, is better than what it had in it's golden generation from 2002 to 2010, but i'd give up half of them for sol campbel + rio ferdinand