Roy Hodgson and Jack Wilshere

[The Great Mass Debater 1,269]

Roy Hodgson says Jack Wilshere''s lack of match practice was the reason for his below-par performance in England''s goalless draw with Ukraine.

http://www.teamtalk.com/news/2483/8916674/Hodgson-Wilshere-not-fully-fit

Erm, then dont pick him Roy? Is that not your job as England manager to decide who plays and assess who is fit to do so? You can pick somebody else you know. What a tool

[ncfc4eva 0]

He wasn''t too know his performance wouldn''t be as expected, looked good v Moldova, just giving his opinion on why he thinks his performance was affected.

[Tetteys Jig 853]

Same as Snodgrass versus Southampton, but it will have done him good to get the playing time.

I don''t really know why Hodgson has to defend a 0-0 draw in Ukraine so much, it''s a really good result and leaves us practically just a win at home to Montenegro away from qualifying.

Now if only there was a way an english man could injure Jovetic before next months game...

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

Am I the only one who is not really convinced by the Wilshere hype ? He looks lightweight to me, too easily disposessed, and too many sloppy passes. Seems to be forever injured ..."lack of match sharpness" blah blah blah.

Also never been too sure about Walcott. Has not really improved or got consistent. Maybe I''m letting my despisal of The Arse cloud my judgement....?

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

The auto censor seems not to like my description of "ARSEnal" above !

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]Am I the only one who is not really convinced by the Wilshere hype ?  [/quote]

There isn''t any hype.

 

He''s a brilliant player.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

Well; OK GJP, that''s your opinion. I beg to differ. The only point I''m making is that huge amounts of the pre-match waffle in Kiev were about Wilshere, and, yet again on the day, he did not really produce. To me, that''s hype.....

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,486]

Wilshere obviously has a huge amount of quality, especially considering he is still only 21. He has struggled at the beginning of this season due to some injury problems which hopefully he''ll be clear of soon.

 

I wouldn''t say he is lightweight at all, I''ve seen he push Fellaini and Yaya Toure off the ball before whilst he has played for Arsenal. Unfortunately teams have taken to targetting him and he gets some pretty rough treatment - in the Villa game everytime he had to ball someone would chop him down.

 

There is a certain amount of hype around him, as he has qualities no other English midfielder has at the moment and he could go on to be a brilliant player. An uninterrupted season would do him the world of good though.

[Salopian 1]

It  was a risk, but so were other players selected - there were several important absentees, and not only strikers. I think that Wilshire and Walcott both came under some physical pressure, to put it mildly, as they had been clearly marked as danger men. This probably reduced the eventual effectiveness of Wilshire.

 

The problem as I see it is that we lack creative midfielders of top quality, so he performed the function, leaving Lampard and Gerrard to perform defensive duties. Youngs and Milner later showed how little creativity they provide. Given that our striking power was very limited, - Lambert, who may give way when Rooney, Wellbeck  and Sturridge are fit again, we needed someone who could unlock a strong, well-organised defence, to enable us to snatch a goal in an otherwise defensive display.

 

It could be that Hodgson knew that he could expect little effective attacking play from the full-backs, because they had to subdue the best Ukraine players in their two wingers, and perhaps he recognised that Walker was not in the best of form. Added to this, with little pace from Milner, Lampard and Gerrard, his only means of attack otherwise was through Walcott, and Ukraine rendered him largely ineffective. In these circumstances, although Wilshire may have been a risk he was needed to create chances.

At his best Wilshire has the ability to run at defences and unsettle them. I suspect that this and his other strengths - vision, touch, control, etc., means that he will be retained even when Hodgson has more fit attackers from whom to select.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

Probably a fairer overall assessment than mine Bethnal . Maybe I have let an anti Arsenal bias creep in !

I''m not saying that JW is not potentially a very good player, but, he is undoubtedly injury prone, and if he wants to play at the top level, he''ll just have to develop the ability to avoid the rough stuff, though I''m not convinced he gets any more than the other top players .

The OP makes a very good point in that it shows the lack of quality in the England midfield squad when RH felt he had to pick someone who is patently not fit, and two people who are the wrong side of 35 .

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]

The OP makes a very good point in that it shows the lack of quality in the England midfield squad when RH felt he had to pick someone who is patently not fit,

 

and two people who are the wrong side of 35 .[/quote]

It would be nice if we had a few more players as good as Wilshere to pick from but we don''t and with the WC coming up he needs the games. The more games they play together the better.

 

Frank Lampard is 35, who is the other one?

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

Fair enough...Gerrard''s 34. I stand corrected. But you know the point I''m making . A country like England should have enough quality midfield players around to obviate the necessity of picking half fit youngsters and people in their mid-30''s. Countries like Spain have other real options when the likes of Iniesta and Xavi are unavailable.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="Reggie Strayshun"]Fair enough...Gerrard''s 34. I stand corrected. But you know the point I''m making . A country like England should have enough quality midfield players around to obviate the necessity of picking half fit youngsters and people in their mid-30''s. Countries like Spain have other real options when the likes of Iniesta and Xavi are unavailable.[/quote]

We probably should but we don''t. Having said that, there are a few exciting youngsters emerging.

 

Realistically most countries will struggle when you get past their strongest 11 or so. It''s only a handful that have real quality in depth.

 

I think most people now realise that England are a bit behind some of the top nations and need to do better at bringing through quality young players.

 

Oh and Gerrard is actually 33, not 34 or 35.  ;-)

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

Oh, for heaven''s sake......

I think that you are being very generous when you say that we are "a bit" behind, GJP. If this had been some meaningless friendly, then a gamble with half fit youngsters would have been justified. But the game in Kiev was the crunch game of the group . Where you are right is that we genuinely did not have anyone better available . We''ve kind of got used to Brazil, Argentina, Italy, Germany etc having a wider choice of quality options in all areas, but , Spain Holland and now Belgium have surpassed us.

It wasn''t just midfield. I''m sorry, but Rickie Lambert simply is not a top International class forward. And to be consistent I said exactly the same about Grant Holt when several people on this forum were touting him for the Euro''s last year.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,269]

We have plenty of adequate central midfielders who could have played instead of a half fit Wilshere. Barry Henderson Parker Milner to name just a few. Not my favourite players but surely better than someone who is only half-fit. Its like when Rooney broke his metatarsal and we still took him to the World Cup (or Euro''s, i forget which now). I hate this celebrity brand type of football that suggests a Rooney with one foot and who hasnt played a game in months is somehow still better than someone firing on all cylinders like Bent or Defoe were at the time. Some players can be back in the England camp quicker than a whippet with a bum full of dynamite as long as they have enough hype behind them. if theyre not fit then they shouldt be playing. Pick them when theyre fit.

[GJP 79]

[quote user="The Great Mass Debater"]We have plenty of adequate central midfielders who could have played instead of a half fit Wilshere. Barry Henderson Parker Milner to name just a few. Not my favourite players but surely better than someone who is only half-fit. Its like when Rooney broke his metatarsal and we still took him to the World Cup (or Euro''s, i forget which now). I hate this celebrity brand type of football that suggests a Rooney with one foot and who hasnt played a game in months is somehow still better than someone firing on all cylinders like Bent or Defoe were at the time. Some players can be back in the England camp quicker than a whippet with a bum full of dynamite as long as they have enough hype behind them. if theyre not fit then they shouldt be playing. Pick them when theyre fit.[/quote]

I can see what you''re saying but Wilshere is such a good player they need him getting the games with the World Cup on the horizon. Not just for his benefit but for the benefit of the team. The more the core group of players play together the better.

 

[0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

I rather feel the problem is the manager. Hodgson done very little at Liverpool or West Brom to justify his appointment as England Manager. The very fact that he is satisfied with a nil -nil draw highlights the fact that it is a no lose scenario and as long as you have that philosophy there will be little progress with the national team. The FA and politically correct managers have been the problem not the players.

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

A reasonable point, Ridgeman. But doesn''t it all go back to the usual conundrum: ie who better could the FA appoint ?. After the Erikson/Capello fiasco, everyone was bleating that the England boss should be English. So the FA pandered to this, and just how many PL managers are English by birth ? Pardew, Bruce, Holloway, Big Sam and our own Chrissy Hughton (he IS English, not Irish !) And would any of these be any better than Roy ?!

I tend to feel that the position should be given to the best man available, and if he happens to be Spanish, French, Mongolian , or whatever, then so be it. But there are so many dyed in the wool Little Englanders who follow the national side, that there will always be a demand for an Englishman.