Barry finds his feet

Gareth Barry's long-awaited return to the England team was regarded by many observers as a galvanising factor for the two 3-0 successes against Israel and Russia in September.


Although the partnership between Emile Heskey and Michael Owen was lauded for providing the finishing touches, it was the dovetailing between the 26-year-old and Steven Gerrard in the centre of midfield which had critics purring.

"The point is your star players don't always make your star team," said former England manager Graham Taylor after the Russia match.

"You have to get the balance and the shape right and anyone can see the balance and shape Barry has given this side.

"Barry has had to wait for his chance. He played 27 times for the England Under-21s and never made that step into the full side but all along, he's had an inner conviction that he is good enough to play for his country."

That conviction was severely tested over the three-and-a-half years he spent in the international wilderness during Sven-Goran Eriksson's reign.

And what made it more galling for the Sussex-born player, is that it came at a time when England were struggling to find left-sided players.

Having made his debut as a 19-year-old against Ukraine in May 2000, Barry was called-up to the England squad by Kevin Keegan for the European Championship the same year.

But when it came to Sven-Goran Eriksson's first game in charge, Barry was relegated to the under-21s and featured only intermittently over the next six years.

Contrast that with another teenager who made his England debut the same day.

Steven Gerrard joined Barry at the Euros that summer but he went on to pick up 47 caps during Eriksson's tenure. In the same period Barry earned just seven.

"There were times when I thought I was not going to get back in again," Barry said.

"Three or four years have ticked by; you have not made a squad - and you start fearing the worst.

"Under Sven, I basically gave up hope. But I always felt I was playing well enough, that time was still on my side - and I just got my head down at Villa and kept going."

That approach eventually lead to Villa boss Martin O'Neill handing him the captaincy and last season shifting him into the middle of the park where he flourished.

So after spending years hoping for a call-up when England were devoid of a left-footed player, Barry perversely got a chance to re-unite with Gerrard in an area considered to be an embarrassment of riches.

The leading argument with Barry, however, was that he brought a completely new dynamic to England's midfield.

While Lampard has been on form for Chelsea over recent seasons, when he does not score, his role in the team has been questioned. And as a more direct player, he can be liable to misplace his passes.

Gareth Barry in action for England against Israel

Playing alongside Gerrard, Barry showed patience, an ability to link play simply and let the attacking players pour forward.

And the fact the pair have been firm friends since making their international debuts, adds an interesting footnote as to why they clicked.

Barry's biggest contribution may well be the pressure he has now put on England's central midfield positions.

But, despite his lack of international experience, he is quietly confident that he can hold his own.

"There is competition everywhere, and it is nice to put my name among the great players being talked about to start for their country," he said.

"It would be great to start - and it was nice to put in two good performances and be talked about for the way I played."

With Gerrard struggling for form and Lampard coming back from injury, it may be that McClaren has to choose between the attacking midfielders rather than cut Barry adrift once again.

(Courtesy: BBC)

The Real Reasons Raúl Will Not Play For Spain

Raúl González has little chance of playing for Spain again under Luis Aragonés after he was part of a clique of veterans that openly criticised the coach during the World Cup Finals last year, according to a report.

The Real Madrid captain has not played for the national team for a year and as calls for his return grow louder, AS believe that they have uncovered the reasons behind his omission.

Alongside players such as Santiago Cañizares and Michel Salgado, complaints were made about training methods and team choices and it was the creation of that divide which led to Raúl being left out.

AS state that the problems started, curiously, after Spain had beaten Ukraine 4-0 in the World Cup Finals and Raúl and Cañizares were caught on television remonstrating with members of the coaching staff.

Cañizares even explained himself to AS after the tournament and stated that he objected to the goalkeepers using tennis balls in training.

In the win against Tunisia, Spain's second group game, Raúl scored, but was then substituted and while pouring wine at his table that evening at a team dinner stated loudly: "I think I am only at the World Cup to be a waiter".

The third game saw Aragonés claim he was using his second choice players against Saudi Arabia and upset Raúl further by naming him in that starting side.

Aragonés was unimpressed with the group that were openly critical of him and was quoted as stating: "The veterans are trying to take me on in an arm-wrestling match."

After losing to France in the elimination phase, two or three of most vociferous critics went from room to room back at the hotel asking: "Let's see what the coach has to say now he has lost this game and we are out of the World Cup playing with these playmakers."

The playmakers jibe came after Aragonés named Xavi, Xabi Alonso and Cesc Fàbregas in the midfield at the expense of a defensive midfielder to win the tackles.

All this led to rumours that the coach had said in private that he had pinpoited two players who had given him enough reasons to expel them from the squad.

That was denied, but what is now true if that since the defeat against Northern Ireland brought matters to a head neither player have ben chosen again.

(Courtesy: goal.com)

Which idiot voted for Phil Neville?

The recently concluded online polls was quite surprising. Generally, the public was generally split and undecided on who occupy the other center midfield berth and partner Stevie G. 44% voted for Hargreaves while another 44% voted for Barry. When you think about it though, Hargreaves had proved himself during the World Cup, and Barry's recent endeavours in the 2 Euro 2008 qualifiers, perhaps it is not quite so surprising.

Personally, i believe Hargreaves should get the nod, because he has had more experience in top flight football ; German league, Champions League at his time with Bayern Munich. Also, he is more suited to playing the tough tackling anchor role, whereas Barry is more of a defensive playmaker type. When playing against top top teams, a defensive playmaker is a luxury England cannot afford.

However, the bigger question is, WHICH IDIOT VOTED FOR PHIL NEVILLE?

Maybe Phil voted for himself

Top 5 reasons why Heskey should be Owen's prefered partner

In light of all the recent debates and endless riots occuring in all over the world, i have devised a very simple TOP 5 list, which should put an end to this madness. Silly football fans, read this and be enlightened.

Heskey is the man to partner Owen.


5. Statistically, England (a.k.a Owen) score more goals if partnered with Heskey

4. His middle name is Ivanhoe. Any opponent would turn into pubescent whiny girls when faced with a player by this name.

3. He wins a lot of free kicks. in key areas. (actually, he just falls around a lot,but the referees think "Golly, that oaf is so big, he can't possibly be falling down on his own...*PHFEEEEEEEEEEEET!!! Freekick!!!*)

2. He can push around opponents until they wither into pubescent whiny girls ("REF! he pushed meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Someone hug me please!)

1. He isn't naturally butt ugly like Crouch or Rooney.

McFadden's goal, brilliant or just lucky?

I've had the chance to watch it a few times now, and i'm convinced it was just a lucky goal. If anything, maybe it should be an own goal, credited to the French keeper, Mickael Landreau. If he had a stronger hand, that shot would have sailed over the cross bar.

Thought, not to take anything away from McFadden, it was a brilliant strike, the turn, touch and shot. Watch it again for yourselves.

McFadden steals victory from the Frenchies!

The Brits suffered a mixed bag of results last night. England, Wales and Scotland all record impressive victories while the only blemish was the Irish games. Both Ireland and Northen Ireland lost their games to Czech Republic and Iceland respectively. Northend Ireland somewhat surprising loss to Iceland was the more unexpected of the results. The Icelandish players seem to be on a sort of mini revival, after comfortably holding Spain last week to a 1-1 draw.

Though the headlines will all be stuffed with praises for the English demolision of 'Mother' Russia, i think Scotland's result was by far the best and most impressive. They went to France with a simple plan, to frustrate and hold their more illustrious opponents. It worked to a charm, with the French unable to break through the stubborn Scottish defence, even with them camped in the Scottish half for most of the game. The stats says it all:

	France	Scotland
Possession	72.00%	28.00%
Shots On Goal	7	2
Corners	16	3

Enigmatic Everton striker, James McFadden, provided the Scots with that little bit of luck, skill and flair upfront, as he scored a glorious 30 yard drive to stun the French crowd. Now the Scots top Group B, and have silenced all doubters. Can they do a Greece and go on to win the Euro 2008 without having any big name players?

Crouch or Heskey? Why not both!

Your eyes do not deceive you. Yes, you read right, i think England should play BOTH Heskey and Crouch. I've given credit to McClown in my previous post, for being bold, and as they say, fortune favors the bold, so again i make reference to this phrase. Can McClown be twice a fortunate man and make England play a bold and outrageous attack, and WIN?

Think i'm full of shite, and have played too much Championship Manager, don't you? Well, you may be 100% right, but think about this formation:

--------------------Robinson---------------------

Richards---Terry---Ferdinand---Cole

-----Gerrard----Hargreaves----Barry--

-----------------------Owen-------------------------

--------------Heskey------Crouch-------------

Defence:
The defence is nothing new. Robinson is only playing because there is no one better. Calamity James is prone to blunders in the big games.

Midfield:
I've opted for a 3 man midfield, anchored by the tireless Hargreaves. With him sitting in that, he is able to provide cover while Gerrard and Barry bomb forward. Furthermore, Gerrard and Barry are very comfortable drifting to wide positions and creating other angles of attack

Attack:
Some defenders say its impossible to play against Heskey as he is just so powerful. Other say that because of Crouch's gangly height and awesome skills, he's just as unplayable. So why not stick them both in front? Then let little Mickey Owen have a free role and let him roam wherever he pleases while the opposition defence gets battered to death by the combined power of Heskey and Crouch.

It is also possible to mix and match this strange looking attack. Owen can be moved up front to partner Crouch with Heskey dropped to the bench, while someone more accustomed to playing in the 'hole' like Joe Cole and Rooney can be given that role.

Ultimately though, i think its a pretty decent idea, but realisticly speaking, McClown should stick with the original team and tactics that won so comprehensively against Israel. Maybe if things go horribly wrong, then he can try out my idea. As they say, if it aint broke, don't fix it.

Fortune favours the bold, eh McClown?

England 3 - Israel 0

Lets face it, Israel didn't even put up a fight. That begs the question though, was it down to England's dominating display, or did Israel just suck? I think its the latter. England will not find it so easy on Wednesday against Russia, who are a top side.

Nevertheless, McClown got a few things right in this game. As the saying goes, fortune favours the bold, and so fortune favoured McClown last night.

The inclusion of Heskey paid off handsomely, as he and Owen paired off as effectively as they did in their Liverpool days. Owen was comfortable, and afforded so much space and room to manouvere because of all the work that Heskey put in.

Barry and SWP show some love (Courtesy: ESPN Soccernet)

Gareth Barry's also revelled in the center midfield position next to Gerrard. Asked to play the playmaker/anchor role, he didn't look out of sorts on the big stage and provided the delicate through ball that slipped 3 Israeli players to arrive at the feet of Owen, who spun and scored a wonderful goal. However, come Wednesday, I suspect Owen Hargreaves may take his place back in the center midfield, as he well should be. Russia won't be as impotent in their attacks as Israel were.

England made full use of the flanks, with the Cole's rampaging down the left and SWP and M.Richards bombing down the right. A.Cole and M.Richards were in the Israeli half so many times, that they probably thought England had 4 wingers on the field. In essense, England really stretched the Israeli defence, and caused all sorts of mayhem.

So, few questions that still require answering, but only McClown and his circus will be able to answer it all:

• Should the primary center midfield position be Gerrard/Hargreaves, followed by Lampard/Barry?
  
• Should Micah Richards keep his place if Gary Neville is fit and available?
• Should Heskey be dropped when Crouch returns on Wednesday?
• Why does P.Neville still get international caps for England?
  

Italy vs France? *YAWN*

They have some of the biggest names in Football. The likes of Viera, Ribery, Anelka, Henry make up some of the talent on show for the French. Their Italian compatriots are no less distinguished; del Piero, Pirlo, Gattuso, Cannavaro and Nesta. However, the very thought of watching these big stars battle it out, just brings tears to my eyes.

No my friends, not tears of joy, but tears that come when one has yawned too much.

Too often, these games between big names just turn out to be defensive tactical battles. So worried are they of making mistakes, that they simply end up playing like Houllier's one side Liverpool teams. I can just imagine the team talk:

"Everyone behind the ball! Wingers, dont you dare do any winging, just tuck into center midfield! Strikers, we don't need you anywhere near the enemy goal, just run back and get behind the f****** ball! We're gonna whoop them 5-0 with an amazing tactic like this boys!!! They'll never know what hit them!!! HOO HAAA!!"

Ah yes, international football, it is a cauldron of intense excitement. Yay. Frankly speaking though, i'd rather watch Mexico.



They may not have won much lately, but they will be soon. Awesome open attacking team play, and they do not have big stars, other than Rafael Marquez, but they do have some players with the potential to be superstars; Nery Castillo and dos Santos.

Prediction: Italy 1 - France 1

Does McClown really need Gerrard to beat Israel?

The news on most soccer pages these past week has been about whether or not Gerrard will play on Saturday. Now that Lampard has been 100% ruled out, this question has taken gargantuan like significance in the grand scheme of all things "ENGLAND", well at least in terms of football.

But honestly, lets compare the world rankings:

12 England

33 Israel

Ok, i would have expected Israel to be much lower than that, so that is indeed news for me. Every knowledgeable fan knows that football on the international stage is very very tight and tricky. Rarely do we see cricket like (e.g. 32-12) scores, but more like the usual 1-0's, 2-1's bla bla bla.

What this means is that international games should never be taken lightly, no matter the opponent. Even more so for a country that is ranked 33 in the world.

Possibly McClown's initial expression when posed the question "Can England beat Israel without Gerrard?"

But, do Israel really have the players to beat top sides? Well, other than Tal Ben Haim and Yossi Benayoun, i'm hard pressed to find anyone that are in the 'world class' standard of a few of the English players.

Furthermore, the English players all play in the best league in the world, the EPL. We expect NOTHING LESS than a Liverpool v Derby scoreline, don't you agree?

But wait, hold on just a minute there partner. 'World class' English players you say?

BOLLOCKS.

I think everyone has come to the realization that the England team are just severly overrated. The only world class players in my opinion are Gerrard, Rooney, Ashley Cole and Terry (and possibly Hargreaves). Lampard is the most overrated of them all. I still don't know why he gets called Fat Frank, but he should be kept on the bench as backup for Gerrard. I won't go into detail about that, as i need a whole new different post to discuss that.

Center midfield is where majority of games are won and lost. This is not to say that the other players are insignificant. Quite the contrary actually. They are important cogs in any well oiled machine, but the machine is utterly useless if its Engine (center midfielders) are a bunch a fat pussies.

England need the explosive power and determination of the Liverpool captain.

With Hargreaves also in doubt, i shudder to think who will be the center midfield combination; Carrick & Barry? Now there's a 'World Class' partnership there, eh? There's a combination that gonna overpower a country ranked 33 in the world, eh?

McClown knows this, and is shitting bricks in the anticipation that Gerrard will be fit and available. He might go so far as to take a big risk and give him those pain injections. McClown knows he can't afford anything other than a comprehensive win, and with Gerrard in the side, that fantasy become that much closer to a reality.

McClown needs Gerrard.

England needs Gerrard.

Steve Mclaren, bold or desperate?

The shock recall of Emile Heskey and the surpise inclusion of Joleon Lescott has deffinately shocked everyone. So whats gotten into Mclaren? Has he lost his marbles or does the inclusion of these 2 players actually bode well for England?

The Good

1. Emile Heskey has actually scored 5 international goals, which is more than the combined total for Alan Smith, Jermaine Defore and Andy Johnson. (Off course, its worth noting that even their combined number of caps is no where near Heskey's 43 caps, but we don't really care about that do we?)
2. Heskey's in not really to score goals anyway, but mainly to partner Owen up front. Owen always scores more, and plays better when partered with a big unselfish brute. Heskey's frame will cause a lot of problems for opposition defenders and allow Owen more time and room to do damage.
3. Heskey's actually having a stormer of a season, and looks hungry
4. Lescott has proved his class time in an average Everton team, making the transition from First Division to Premier league look seamless. He's even outscoring Andy Johnson at Everton. Is there any other English defender (who isnt retired or injured) that is playing better and more consistently than Lescott?
   

The Bad

1. Heskey can't score for nuts, and he tends to fall down on his a** a lot and look like a clumsy bull.
2. Can England cope without both Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard, with a strikeforce of Owen and Heskey?
   
3. Is there anything bad to say about Lescott, other than this picture below: